Anda di halaman 1dari 4

Differences in Mathematical Communication Skills of

Students Taught by Numbered Heads Together


Combined with A Deductive Inductive Approach with
Students Taught by Expository Method in 8th Grade
of SMPN 1 Percut Sei Tuan

Elisabeth Margareth Gultom Edi Syahputra


Post Graduate Program in Mathematics Education Post Graduate Program in Mathematics Education
State University of Medan State University of Medan
Medan, Indonesia Medan, Indonesia
Corresponding email: elisabethgultom.eg@gmail.com

AbstractMathematical communication is one of the mathematics that he has learned, and (6) appreciating the
standard process that must be mastered by students. This beauty and strength of mathematical notation, and his role
research aims to determine whether the mathematical in developing mathematical ideas. [1]
communication ability of students who were taught with It confirms that, students mathematical communication
cooperative learning model Numbered Heads Together combined ability is really need to be developed, because through
with inductive and deductive approach is better than the
mathematical communication students can think
mathematical communication skills of students who were taught
by expository method in 8th grade of SMP Negeri 1 Percut Sei
mathematically both oral and writing.
Tuan. The research population is all of 8 th graders of SMP Negeri The reality shows that the result of mathematics learning in
1 Percut Sei Tuan. The sample consists of 2 classes, the first class Indonesia in the aspect of mathematical communication is still
is called the experimental class and the second class is called the low. As revealed by Izzati (Prayitno, 2013), that the learning
control class with the number of students in each class is 35 of mathematics for students is still not giving enough attention
students. From the data processing, the average of students' to the development of these capabilities [2]. The same thing
mathematical communication ability increased by 1.457 for the was found by Kadir (Prayitno, 2013), that the students
experimental class and 0.832 for the control class. Based on mathematical communication in coastal areas is still low, both
hypothesis testing with = 0,055 obtained t count is greater than
in terms the ranking of the school, as well as learning models
ttabel, so it is concluded that mathematical communication ability
of student who were taught by Numbered Heads Together [3]. This also line with that expressed Qohar (Prayitno, 2013),
combined inductive and deductive approach is better than that the junior students' mathematical communication skills
student's mathematical communication ability who were taught (especially in non-urban areas) is still lacking, either verbal or
by expository method in 8th grade of SMP Negeri 1 Percut Sei written [4].
Tuan. Communication written restricted on communication
Keywordscomponent; mathematical communication; activities models Cai, Lane, and Jakabein, (Fachrurazi 2011)
deductive inductive approach; expository method which includes:
1. Writing (writing), writing is the activities carried out
I. INTRODUCTION with conscious for revealed and reflect mind, as
One of the standard process that must be mastered by outlined in the media, paper, computer as well as other
students is mathematical communication. NCTM (Ansari, media. Write is helpful tool because students earn
2009) suggests that: mathematics experience as a creative activities.
Mathematics as a communication tool is the development
2. Draw mathematics, students able to draw pictures,
of language and symbols to communicate mathematical
ideas, so students can: (1) express and explain their charts, graphs, and table completely as a result of the
thinking about mathematical ideas and its relationships; (2) translation of a problem or idea. Drawing can also help
formulate mathematical definitions and make children explain concepts or ideas, and make it easier
generalizations gained through investigation; (4) reading for children to come up with breakthrough strategies.
mathematical discourse with comprehension, (5)
explaining, proposing and expanding questions on
3. Mathematical expression is a form of mathematical
representation. on the ability making expression
mathematics, students able modeling mathematics then TABLE I. CONTROL GROUPS FORMED RANDOMLY AND GIVEN PRETES
AND POSTES DESIGN
do calculation or got solutions. [5]
Group Pretest Treatment Postest
On generally, communication that occurs in learning Experiment T1 X T2
mathematics in the classroom only takes place in a linear Control T1 Y T2
manner, which means the communication only goes one way, Information:
with the teacher as the information giver, and the students as T1 = pretest
the recipient of the information. Lack of good communication
with students is caused by the learning method that teachers T2 = Postest
used can enable students to communicate and issue ideas with X = The treatment of the experimental group with Numbered
good math for learning in the classroom is still centered on the Heads Together learning combined with inductive and
teacher (teacher-oriented). Teachers deliver materials directly deductive approaches.
and students not required to find their own understanding. Y = Treatment of control group with expository learning.
This method of teaching is called the expository method. The population in this research were all students of class
One way that can be used to improve the ability of VIII Negeri 1 Senior High School Percut Sei Tuan Lesson
students' mathematical communication is to implement Year 2014/2015 as many as 324 students which is divided into
cooperative learning model, because one of the benefits of 9 parallel classes. Sample in research was taken as much two
cooperative learning is the sharing process among the classes, VIII-2 as the experimental class that taught by
participants learn. cooperative learning model Numbered Heads Together,
One type of cooperative learning is Numbered Heads combined with inductive and deductive approach and one
Together. Numbered Heads Together (NHT) is type of more class is class VIII-5 as the control class that is taught by
cooperative learning that designed for affect pattern students expository. Each class has 35 students.
interaction and unpacking alternative to class traditional. [6] Instruments that used for this research is test. The tests
Furthermore, the cooperative learning model Numbered is in essay form. Test given before and after learning.
Heads Together is combined with inductive and deductive Technique analysis of the data used is analysis difference with
approaches. The inductive approach is an approach that begins use formula t-test first do test normality and test homogeneity
by presenting a number of specific circumstances then variance second group samples.
summed up into a fact, principle, or rule. While the deductive Hypothesis to be tested is formulated as follows:
approach is the teaching approach that begins by presenting : 1 2 (1)
the rule, the general principle is followed by specific examples
or application of the rule, the general principle into a special : 1 2 (2)
state.
The application of inductive and deductive approaches are
H0 : Students mathematical communication skills taught by
in the phase of asking questions on learning syntax of
mathematical learning model Numbered Heads
Numbered Heads Together. Teachers will ask questions that
Together, combined with inductive and deductive
will direct students in making conclusions and be able to make
approaches is lower than or equal to a mathematical
students can apply the definition or concept that has been
communication ability of students taught using
given by teachers in answering questions. With the
expository method.
implementation of cooperative learning model Numbered
Heads Together with inductive and deductive approaches, Ha Students mathematical communication skills taught by
:
students individually and in groups can be more active in the mathematical learning model Numbered Heads
learning process in the classroom and have the ability to Together, combined with inductive and deductive
develop knowledge together. approach is better than the written mathematical
The purpose of this study was to determine whether the communication skills of students who are taught by
students mathematical communication skills who taught by expository method.
cooperative learning model Numbered Heads Together,
Testing criteria are: H0 accepted if , where
combined with inductive and deductive approaches are better
than the ability of students mathematical communication skill
who taught by expository method. obtained from the distribution t list with
and opportunities . For other t prices rejected.

II. METODOLOGY III. DISCUSSION


This study was an experimental study. Before being given Before do learning, first given pretest at both kel as the
treatment, each class is given pretest first. For more details, goal for knowing ability initial written mathematical
please see the following table:
communication students. In summary the pretest results of which mean Fcount is lower than F table . With thereby so we
both groups are shown in Table 4.1 below: conclude both class come from homogeneous population.
Then hypothesis testing was taken. Testing hypothesis
TABLE II. DATA OF EXPERIMENT AND CONTROL CLASS for mathematical communication skills of students performed
No Statistics Experiment Class Control Class on the data pretest and posttest and do through test difference
1 N 35 35 two averages or t test.
2 Amount of Value 44.56 32.32
Dari hasil perhitungan diperoleh .
3 Average 1,273 0.923
4 Variance 0.11 0.18 Selanjutnya dengan meninjau harga pada dan
5 Standard deviation 0.332 0.43
6 Maximum Value 1.76 1.84 taraf signifikan = 0,05 diperoleh .
7 Minimum Value 0.64 0
The table above shows that the pretest average of Dengan demikian disimpulkan maka Ha
experimental class is higher than the pretest average of control diterima atau H0 ditolak sehingga disimpulkan bahwa
class. It is also seen that the maximum pretest value of kemampuan komunikasi matematis tertulis siswa yang diajar
students in the experimental class is lower than the maximum dengan model pembelajaran kooperatif Numbered Heads
student pretest score in the control class. Together yang dipadukan dengan pendekatan induktif dan
At the end of the meeting, students are given postes. deduktif lebih baik daripada kemampuan komunikasi
Posttest given to determine the ability of the student matematis tertulis siswa yang diajar dengan metode
mathematical communication after student given teaching ekspositori.
cooperative learning model Numbered Heads Together with From calculation we obtained tcount = 2.66 then ttable =
inductive deductive approach in the experimental class and 1.66867 with level of significant = 0.05. So, tcount > ttable. Thus
learning with expository method in the control class. concluded that Ha is received or H0 rejected so concluded that
In summary the postest result of the two classes are mathematical communication skills of students taught by
shown in the following table: cooperative learning model Numbered Heads Together,
combined with inductive and deductive approach is better than
TABLE III. POSTEST RESULT IN EXPERIMENT AND CONTROL CLASS the written mathematical communication skills of students
No Statistics Experiment Class Control Class who are taught by expository method.
1 N 35 35
2 Amount of Value 83.1 61.12 IV. CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION
3 Average 2.73 1,746 A. Conclusion
4 Variance 0.26 0.261
Based on the results of research and discussion that has
5 Standard deviation 0.51 0.511
6 Maximum Value 3.2 2.56 been described in the previous chapter, it can be summed up as
7 Minimum Value 1.44 0.8 follows: the ability mathematical communication students
From the table above it can be seen that the average taught learning model Numbered Heads Together combined
postes grade of the experimental class is higher than the approach inductive and deductive more good rather than the
average postest grade of the control class. While the variance mathematical communication ability of the students who were
and standard deviation of the two classes are the same. taught by the expository method on the functional material in
Then, Liliefors test is used to tes the normality of the class VIII of Negeri 1 Junior High School
data. Data is distributed nolmal if L0 < Ltable with = 0.05.
B. Suggestion
TABLE IV. NORMALITY TEST RESULT IN BOTH CLASS As for suggestions that can be given from the results of
NO Class L0 Ltable Information
this study, namely:
1 Experiment 0.12839 0.149761 Normal 1) Teacher should study the cooperative learning model
2 Control 0.097543 0.149761 Normal Numbered Heads Together to be applied in the study of
The test of normality shows that L0 < Ltable in both class, mathematics because this model can help improve
so it can be concluded that the classes is normal distributed. students' mathematical communication in writing.
Furthermore, homogeneity test is taken.
2) School expected for more pay attention advantages and
TABLE V. HOMOGENEITY TEST RESULT weakness from learning to use in teach mathematics in
effort improve ability communication students.
NO Class Variance Fcount Ftable
1 Experiment 0.235326 3) Students should more confident and courageous to
1.5575 1.776
2 Control 0.151086 communicate his ideas and opinions and can better
On table above visible that the experimental class has a maintain order in the learning activities in the
variance of 0.235326 and the control class has a variance of classroom.
0.151086, which means the variance of the experimental class
4) For researchers who want to do the same study should
is greater than the control class variance, so from the
prepare matter of mathematical communication skills
calculation results obtained Fcount = 1.5575 and Ftable = 1.776
test is more reliable in order to better disclosure of [5] Isjoni, Cooperative Learning-Efektivitas Pembelajaran Kelompok.
Bandung: Alfabeta, 2011.
mathematical communication skills of students and do
[6] Istarani, 58 Model Pembelajaran Inovatif, Medan: Media Persada, 2012.
more thorough preparation and careful allocate time so
[7] I. Nur, Komunikasi matematik dan pendidikan matematika realistik,
students more active in the learning process teach and [Prosiding Seminar Nasional Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika,
able improve ability communication be more good. pp. 721-725]
[8] P. Sudi, Komunikasi matematis siswa smp dalam menyelesaikan soal
matematika berjenjang ditinjau dari perbedaan gender, November 2013
[Seminar Nasional Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika. Pendidikan
REFERENCES Matematika FMIPA UNY]
[9] Q, Abdul. Pengembangan instrumen komunikasi matematis untuk
siswa smp, 2011 [Lomba dan Seminar Matematika XIX :46-47]
[1] A. Bansu, Komunikasi, Matematik-Konsep dan Aplikasi. Banda Aceh:
[10] R. Yatim, Paradigma Baru Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Prenada Media Grup,
Sahabat Pena, 2009.
2010.
[2] A. Suharsimi, Dasar-dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara,
[11] S. Sagala, Konsep dan Makna Pembelajaran, Bandung: Alfabeta, 2009
2012.
[12] S. Wina, Strategi Pembelajaran Berorientasi Standar Proses Pendidikan,
[3] Asmin, A. Mansyur, Pengukuran dan Penilaian Hasil Belajar dengan
Bandung: Prenada Media Grup, 2011
Analisis Klasik dan Modern. Medan: Larispa Indonesia, 2012.
[13] S, Nana. Metoda Statistika, Bandung: Tarsito, 2002
[4] Fachrurazi, Penerapan Pembelajaran Berbasis Masalah Untuk
Meningkatkan Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis dan Komunikasi Matematis [14] Trianto, Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif. Jakarta:
Siswa Sekolah Dasar, vol 1, pp. 76 - 88. Kencana, 2010