Effectiveness of the CIRC model using mind mapping method toward student learning outcomes

Tujuan dari penelitian ini untuk mengetahui perbedaan hasil belajar aspek kognitif dan psikomotor siswa, antara model pembelajaran CIRC menggunakan metode mind mapping, dan model pembelajaran CIRC menggunakan concept mapping. Penelitian ini tergolong penelitian quasi experimental, dengan desain nonequivalent control group. Instrumen pengumpulan data menggunakan tes hasil belajar kognitif, dan pengamatan hasil belajar psikomotor. Tes hasil belajar dilakukan sebanyak 2 kali yaitu pretest dan posttest. Peningkatan hasil belajar kognitif diperoleh melalui perhitungan nilai N-Gain score, sedangkan pengamatan hasil belajar ranah psikomotor dilakukan 1 kali oleh 2 orang pengamat. Uji statistik melalui uji beda yang dilakukan setelah uji normalitas. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa rata-rata N-Gain score dari hasil belajar kognitif CIRC-mind mapping yaitu 74, sedangkan pada CIRC-concept mapping adalah 64. Nilai hasil belajar aspek psikomotor berdasarkan kesepakatan antar pengamat adalah 96 pada CIRC-mind mapping, sedangkan pada CIRC-concept mapping yaitu 93. Dapat disimpulkan bahwa hasil belajar aspek kognitif dan psikomotor siswa lebih tinggi pada pembelajaran dengan CIRC-mind mapping, daripada model CIRC-concept mapping. The purpose of this study was to determine the differences in students' cognitive and psychomotor learning outcomes between the CIRC learning model using the mind mapping method and the CIRC learning model using concept mapping. This research was a quasi-experimental study with a nonequivalent control group design. The data collection instrument used a learning outcome test-cognitive and psychomotor learning outcome observations. Cognitive learning outcomes tests were carried out two times, namely, pretest and posttest. The increase in cognitive learning outcomes obtained by calculating the N-Gain score. Observation of psychomotor learning outcomes was carried out once by two observers. The statistical test in this study was a different test carried out after the normality test. The results showed that the average N-Gain score from cognitive learning outcomes CIRC-mind mapping was 74, while CIRC-concept mapping was 64. Psychomotor learning scores based on the agreement between observers were 96 on CIRC-mind mapping, while CIRC-concept mapping was 93. The cognitive and psychomotor learning outcomes of students using CIRC-mind mapping are higher than using CIRC-concept mapping.

Kajian profil indikator kemampuan argumentasi ilmiah pada materi zat aditif dan zat adiktif

Argumentasi ilmiah penting untuk dikembangkan karena dapat melatih berpikir secara ilmiah, berkomunikasi, dan bertindak seperti ilmuan. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui kemampuan argumentasi ilmiah dan mendeskripsikan profil kemampuan argumentasi ilmiah siswa berdasarkan indikator. Penelitian melibatkan siswa kelas VIII B SMP Negeri 9 Salatiga sebagai subyek penelitian yang ditentukan melalui teknik purposive random sampling. Materi pelajaran yang dipilih adalah zat aditif dan zat adiktif. Teknik pengumpulan data menggunakan observasi, tes, dan wawancara. Instrumen penelitian dikembangkan dan diuji validitas isi dan konstruk. Data dianalisis secara kuantitatif dan dideskripsikan secara kualitatif dengan teknik triangulasi. Tahapan analisis data meliputi pengumpulan data, reduksi data, display data, dan pengambilan kesimpulan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa subyek memiliki kemampuan argumentasi ilmiah dengan kategori sangat baik (5%), baik (46%), cukup (41%), dan tidak baik (8%). Diketahui bahwa profil kemampuan argumentasi ilmiah siswa berdasarkan indikator secara berurutan yaitu kemampuan pada claim (skor rata-rata: 2,68), rebuttal (skor rata-rata: 2,4), data (skor rata-rata: 2,24), dan warrant (skor rata-rata: 1,33).Scientific arguments are essential to developing because they can train to think scientifically, communicate, and act like scientists. This study aims to determine the ability of scientific argumentation. Moreover, describe the ability of students to scientific argumentation based on indicators. The study involved students of class B 8th grade in Junior High School 9 Salatiga as research subjects determined through a purposive random sampling technique. The subject matter chosen is additives and addictive substances. Data collection techniques using observation, tests, and interviews. The research instrument was developed and tested for content and construct validity. Data were analyzed quantitatively and described qualitatively by triangulation techniques. Stages of data analysis include data collection, data reduction, data display, and conclusion making. The results showed that the subjects had the ability of scientific argumentation with top categories (5%), good (46%), sufficient (41%), and not good (8%). It was knowing that the profile of students' scientific argumentation abilities based on indicators in a sequence is the ability to claim (average rating: 2.68), rebuttal (average rating: 2.4), data (average rating: 2.24), and warrant (average rating: 1.33).