Efektifitas Strategi Thinking Aloud Pair Problem Solving (TAPPS) dengan Pendekatan Open-Ended pada Siswa SMP

Apri Kurniawan

doi:10.33627/sm.v7i1.1059

Apri Kurniawan Sekolah Tinggi Agama Katolik Negeri Pontianak

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33627/sm.v7i1.1059

Keywords: Open-Ended, TAPPS, Learning Achievement, Curiosity

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to test whether the Open-Ended approach with the Thinking Aloud Pair Problem Solving (TAPPS) strategy is effective in terms of learning achievement and curiosity of junior high school students. The difference between this research and previous studies is that in the use of an open-ended approach students are required to express their thoughts orally to their colleagues through the TAPPS strategy. The One Group Pretest Posttest Design was used in this quasi-experimental study. The research sample was selected using cluster random sampling, with this technique class IIC was selected as the sample class. Multiple choice questions were used in this study to see learning achievement and questionnaires were used to see curiosity. Proportions test, paired t-test, and one-sample t-test were used to evaluate effectiveness. The proportion test shows that for both learning achievement and curiosity while . Paired t-test showed for learning achievement and for curiosity while the one sample t-test showed for learning achievement and for curiosity. For the last two tests use . The criteria for the three tests are the same, that is, they are met if . Based on the results of statistical tests, it can be concluded that the Open-Ended approach with the TAPPS strategy is effective for students in terms of learning achievement and curiosity, according to hypothesis testing at a significance level of 5%.

References

Arthur, L. (2010). The early years learning framework: building confident learners. Elect Printing.

Brent, R., & Felder, R. (2012). Learning by solving solved problems. 46, 29–30.

Inprasitha, M. (2006). OPEN-ENDED APPROACH AND TEACHER EDUCATION. In Tsukuba Journal of Educational Study in Mathematics (Vol. 25).

Kwon, O. N., Park, J. H., & Park, J. S. (2006). Cultivating divergent thinking in mathematics through an open-ended approach. Asia Pacific Education Review, 7(1), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03036784

Linn, R., Bond, L., Carr, P., Hammond, L. D., Harris, D., Hess, F., & Shulman, L. (2009). Student Learning, Student Achievement: How Do Teachers Measure Up? National board professional teaching standars (NBPTS).

Litman, J. A., & Jimerson, T. L. (2004). The Measurement of Curiosity As a Feeling of Deprivation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 82(2), 147–157. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8202_3

McElmeel, S. L. (2002). Character Education: A Book Guide for Teachers, Librarians, and Parents. Greenwood Publishing Group.Inc.

Muazaroh, A. N., & Abadi, I. G. S. (2020). Efektifitas Model Pembelajaran Open Ended Berbantuan Lembar Kerja Siswa Terhadap Kemampuan Berpikir Kreatif. 8(3), 372–384.

Mutmainah. (2021). KEMAMPUAN BERPIKIR KREATIF MATEMATIKA MATERI KUBUS DAN BALOK SISWA MTsN 1 MAKASSAR. SUPERMAT Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 5(1), 21–29.

Nitko, A. J., & Brookhart, S. M. (2011). Educational assessment of students. Pearson.

Noh, T., Jeon, K., & Huffman, D. (2005). The Effects of Thinking Aloud Pair Problem Solving on High School Students’ Chemistry Problem-Solving Performance and Verbal Interactions. Journal of Chemical Education, 82(10), 1558–1564. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed082p1558

O’Connor, K. (2009). How to grade for learning K-12. Corwin.

Pane, I. P. P. (2019). EFEKTIVITAS PENDEKATAN OPEN-ENDED TERHADAP KEMAMPUAN BERPIKIR KRITIS MATEMATIS SISWA DI MAN TAPANULI SELATAN. In Mathematic Education Journal)MathEdu (Vol. 2, Issue 2). http://journal.ipts.ac.id/index.php/

Renner, B. (2006). Curiosity About People: The Development of a Social Curiosity Measure in Adults. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87(3), 305–316. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8703_11

Saironi, M. (2022). LEARNING WITH ETHNOMATHEMATICS BASED OPEN ENDED APPROACH IMPROVES CREATIVE THINKING ABILITY, CURIOSITY CHARACTER.

Shawada, T. (2005). Developing lesson plans. In J. P. Becker & S. Shimada (Eds.), The Open-Ended Approach: A New Proposal For Teaching Mathematics (pp. 23–35). The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Inc.

Shimada, S. (2005). The significance of an open-ended approach. In J. P. Becker & S. Shimada (Eds.), The Open-Ended Approach: A New Proposal For Teaching Mathematics (pp. 1–9). The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Inc.

Sholikhah, Z., Kartana, T. J., & Utami, W. B. (2018). EFEKTIFITAS MODEL PEMBELAJARAN OPEN-ENDED TERHADAP PRESTASI BELAJAR MATEMATIKA DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS SISWA. JES-MAT, 4(1), 35–46.

Sugiyono. (2018). Metode Penelitian: Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.

Suryaningsih, T., & Astuti, A. (2021). Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Open Ended terhadap Kemampuan Berpikir Kreatif Matematis Siswa Kelas IV pada Materi Pecahan. In Elementar (Elementary of Tarbiyah): Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar (Vol. 1, Issue 1). http://uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/elementar

Whimbey, A., Lockhead, J., & Narode, R. (2013). Problem solving & comprehension (7th ed). Routledge.

Zamania, T., Aziz, A., & Lestari, W. (2022). RESPON SISWA TERHADAP MEDIA TANGRAM DALAM MEMAHAMI KONSEP BANGUN DATAR KELAS VII. SUPERMAT Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 6(1), 79–90.