KEEFEKTIFAN MODEL PEMBELAJARAN MAKE A MATCH DAN CARD SORT BERBANTUAN PUZZLE DITINJAU DARI HASIL BELAJAR SISWA KELAS 4 SD

Authors

  • Tisia Selvy Fynata Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana Salatiga
  • Mawardi Mawardi Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana Salatiga
  • Suhandi Astuti Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana Salatiga

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31764/justek.v1i1.411

Keywords:

Make a Match Card Sort Puzzle Hasil Belajar

Abstract

Abstrak: Tujuan penelitian ini untuk mengetahui keefektifan model pembelajaran Make a Match dan Card Sort berbantuan puzzle ditinjau dari hasil belajar siswa kelas 4 di SD Gugus Diponegoro. Penelitian ini menggunakan jenis kuasi eksperimen. Hasil nilai signifikansi diperoleh nilai sig. (2-tailed) 0,022 dan sign.(1-tailed) 0,0105 dengan thitung 2,328. Nilai probabilitas lebih kecil dari 0,05 maka H0 ditolak dan diterimaHa, artinya hasil belajar materi tematik dalam penerapan model pembelajaran Make A Match berbantuan puzzle lebih unggul daripada model pembelajaran Card Sort. Hasil hipotesis menunjukkan bahwa Ho ditolak, hasil rata–rata nilai posttest eksperimen 1 lebih tinggi dari posttest eksperimen 2 mendukunghasil uji hipotesis yang menyatakan adanya perbedaan hasil signifikan.Data komparasi nilai posttest eksperimen 1 adalah 81,22 sedangkan rata-ratanilai posttest eksperimen 2 adalah 74,50.

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to knowing the effectiveness of Make a Match and Card Sort learnng models with assisted puzzle reviewed from the 4th graders of primary school learning outcome in Diponegoro’s Cluster. The technique used in this study was quasi experimental.the sig. (2-tailed) was 0,022 and the sig. (1-tailed) was 0,0105 and tcount were 2,328. the Propability were smaller than 0,05 so H0 was rejected and Hawere accepted, it means learning outcome in thematic topic using Make A Match with assisted puzzle learning model was higher than using Card Sort learning model. Hypotheses result showed that Ho is rejected, the average of first experimental class posttest is higher than the second experimental class support the hypotheses test which explained that there were a significant differences. Comparation posttest’s values in first experimental class were 81,22 and then the second experimental class were 74,50.

Downloads

Published

2018-04-20

Issue

Section

Articles