Improving High-Order Thinking Ability in IPS Learning using Means Ends Analysis Model, Study notes of Designs and Groups

Download Improving High-Order Thinking Ability in IPS Learning using Means Ends Analysis Model and more Study notes Designs and Groups in PDF only on Docsity! Application of Means Ends Analysis (MEA) Learning Model in Attempt to Improve Student’s High Order Thinking (Classroom Action Research in Class VIII-D SMPN 5 Bandung) Alif Aulya Riana *, Aim Abdulkarim, Jupri Email: Alifaulya15@gmail.com Abstract--This study is based on the problems that occur in IPS learning in class VIII-D students of SMPN 5 Bandung that is teacher-centered in the classroom and the ability of students to think high-order are still low. The alternative problem solving chosen is by applying the Means Ends Analysis (MEA) learning model. Based on the background, the formulation of this study problem is how the planning, implementation, implementation results and what are the obstacles of the learning model Means Ends Analysis in attempt to improve the ability of high-order thinking. Reviewing the problems to be studied in relation to the learning process, the author chose Classroom Action Research (PTK) with Kemmis and Taggart cycle model in 3 cycles with 12 actions. Implementation of learning by using learning model Means Ends Analysis in improving the ability of students high-order thinking are said to succeed. The improvement of high-order thinking ability of students can be seen from the development of aspects that become indicators of high-order thinking. All aspects of this indicator have evolved from cycle 1 to cycle 3, from which initially the quality is less, it is sufficient to improve. In conclusion, the implementation of learning model Means Ends Analysis can improve the ability of high-order thinking of students in IPS learning. This is supported by the achievement of all indicators in analyzing and evaluating. Both are in good categories and indicators to create are in enough category. Keywords: High Order Thinking Ability, Means Ends Analysis (MEA) Learning Model, IPS Learning. INTRODUCTION Based on observations made in class VIII-D SMP Negeri 5 Bandung, the author found various problems that exist in the classroom in IPS learning. These problems include the low ability to think high-order students. This problem is seen when teacher asks questions to students to appear less enthusiastic in answering questions. In this learning activity, teacher occasionally asks analytical questions to students such as "In your opinion, what is the relation of function and role of natural resources to human life? Just imagine if the natural resources in Indonesia are depleted, what will happen? ". When teachers ask these questions, students are less willing to express their opinion and analysis. Whereas when teachers ask questions that are only limited to knowledge such as "What is a natural resource?", Students look enthusiastic to answer the question where the answer is already written in the text book. This indicates the low level of thinking ability of class VIII-D students of SMP Negeri 5 Bandung in IPS learning. The problems that arise above are caused by several factors such as the use of learning model that has not been done optimally. Students focus on learning that is emphasized on lecture methods in classroom and students look passive in the learning activities and follow what the teacher presented. In addition, IPS learning in the classroom tends to be textbook oriented and does not lead students to think deeper in the activities. These obstacles are one of the obstacles to optimizing IPS learning in the classroom. Students are accustomed to listening and taking notes, and are less exposed to the problems that exist. From the problems that have been mentioned, the author focuses more on the problem of low ability to think high-order students in class VIII- D SMP Negeri 5 Bandung. With the focus of the problems taken by the author is to improve the ability of high-order thinking of students, the author tries to develop the learning activities of the class to achieve the competence that will give rise to high-order thinking ability of students through means- ends analysis model. Implementation of learning means-ends analysis model will bring up many problems that exist near the environment of students. Students will be directed to be able to analyze various problems contextually. This learning model can be implemented to direct students in the problem- solving process in groups by identifying into sub core problems close to the daily environment of students. In addition, the means-ends analysis model is a series of processes in a systematic, structured and meaningful way. As stated by Huda (2014, pp. 294) that: "MEA is a strategy that separates the known problem (problem state) and goal to be achieved (goal state) which then proceeded to perform various ways to reduce the difference between the problems and goals". The reason for using Means Ends Analysis (MEA) learning model is expected to improve the ability of high-order thinking of students, where in this learning model students are invited directly in analyzing the problem solving contextually. According to Suyitno (2006: 25) citing Wiederhold's opinion, states that "problem-solving model is seen as a learning model that can improve students' high order thinking skills (HOT)". This mean ends analysis means that students play an active role in IPS learning by conducting group discussions that will not make students bored in learning and learning model is focused on students who play an active role (student center) and teachers only as a facilitator. High- order thinking ability by Anderson and Krathwohl (2001 pp. 30) "ability that includes in the high-order thinking category is ability to analyze, evaluate and create." Through means ends analysis means that students are able to identify problems, analyze problems, find conclusions from a problem and be able to design a way to solve the problem. From the learning process, the ability to think is not just rote or memory only. From the above problems, the author is interested in conducting classroom action research. With the title of this study is "Application of Means Ends Analysis (MEA) Learning Model in Attempt to improve High Order Thinking Ability in IPS Learning (in Class VIII-D order thinking. This is evidenced by the achievement of good predicate in the assessment cycle 2 and as many as 18 people or as much as 51% of students are in the enough category and also seen in the average score of the class where class VIII-D only get 68% score so that in cycle 2 high-order thinking of students are in good enough level. And in cycle 3, students have improved from the cycle and are already in good category. We can see from 35 students, 28 people or by 80% who have achieved high-order thinking skills. This is evidenced by the achievement of good predicate in the assessment cycle 3 and as many as 7 people or as much as 20% of students are in the enough category and also seen in the average score of the class where class VIII D who scored 77% so that in cycle 3 the ability to think high-order students have been at a good level. In this study, the provision of written test proved to increase the thinking of high-order students. This is in line with the opinion of Mundilarto (2010: p. 58) states that "the test is very appropriate to measure the ability to think high-order students." Overall, the achievement of indicators of high- order thinking ability of students each cycle as follows: Skls Ability Score Ket C4 C5 C6 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 C C K K K K 8 C 2 B B C C C K 13 B 3 B B B B B C 17 B Information: Based on the above table, it describes the achievement of the indicators of high-order thinking ability of students in IPS learning. If it is divergence of each indicator, then the improvement of high-order thinking students of each indicator will be different. Indicators with the highest improvement are analyzing (C4) and evaluating (C5) as well as indicators that look weak ie creating (C6). In cycle 1, achievement of the indicator is in enough criteria which only 8 points. Based on the assessment of cycle 1, students are quite capable in analyzing and identifying problems. However, students are still lacking in judgment, accepting and rejecting a statement, generalizing an idea and designing ways to solve problems. In cycle 2, achievement of the indicator is in good category by obtaining 13 points. Students are quite capable of implementing several indicators through activities that have been designed by the author. Students are only lacking in terms of designing ways to solve problems. In cycle 3, the achievement of indicator has been in good category with point 17. Students are good in applying indicator of high order thinking ability based on Bloom taxonomy revision. This is seen from indicator in analyzing and evaluating in good category, while in the indicator of creation is in enough category. Based on these data there is a significant increase. It is evident from each cycle. Students can already think in depth. This is indicated by an increase in the indicator analyze (C4) and evaluate (C5) is in both category and creativity indicators (C6) on the category is quite good. As expressed by Sizer, 1992, p. 29 (in Johnson, 2008, pp. 182) which states using high-order thinking ability in the correct context teaches students "deep thinking habits, living habits with an intelligent, balanced, and accountable approach." So it can be concluded that students have been able to think deeply and students can already use the ability to think high order through means ends analysis in learning IPS. Category Score B (3) Good 13 – 18 C (2) Enough 7 – 12 K (1) Less 1 – 6 CONCLUSION First, in the implementation of the second cycle, learning activities carried out in group activities and question and answer activities of teachers and students. This is done to measure the extent to which the ability of high-order thinking of students who conducted orally but has not run effectively. In the final activity the teacher gives an individual written test, but has not seen a good improvement in high-order thinking because students are still not familiar with the questions that are analytical. Second, in the implementation of the second cycle, learning activities have seen quite effective where the students began to dare to show the ability to think because of the reward in the form of additional value from teachers. And in the written test that the teacher gave, the students have experienced a pretty good improvement in thinking the high order. This happens because students are accustomed to working on the questions of the questions that are analytical. Third, in the implementation of the second cycle, the learning activities have been going well because the students will apply the learning model. This can be seen from the group activities of students that can already use the ability to think high order orally or non verbally. And on the written test given by the teacher, the students have experienced a significant increase in using the ability of high order thinking. The obstacles faced by author as follows: first, time study which is limited, due to the existence of school exam activities and national examinations in class IX. Second, the uneducated students in using means ends analysis learning model causes students difficulty in doing their activities, over time of this obstacles can be overcome. During the learning process, means ends analysis learning model increases the high-order thinking ability of the students in IPS learning, proved to be a good improvement in every cycle of action implementation. THANK-YOU NOTE Prof. Mr. Dr. H. Aim Abdulkarim, M.Pd and Mr. Drs. Jupri, M.T as a lecturer I and II who have provided guidance, motivation and guidance to the author in completing this study. REFERENCES Anderson, L.W and Krathwohl, D.R. 2001. A Taxonomy of Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York Longman. Dimyati dan Mudjiono. (2009). Belajar dan Pembelajaran. Jakarta: PT. Rineka Cipta. Gunawan, A.W. (2007). Genius Learning Strategy. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Hopkins, D. (2011). Panduan Guru: Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Penerjemah: Achmad Fawaid. Bandung: Rizqi Press. Huda, M. 2014. Model-Model Pengajaran & Pembelajaran. Yogyakarta : Pusraka Belajar. Johnson, E.B. (2008). Contextual Teaching Learning. Bandung: MLC. Komalasari, K. (2011). Pembelajaran Kontekstual Konsep dan Aplikasi. Bandung: Refika Aditama. Mundilarto. 2010. Penilaian Hasil Belajar Fisika. Yogyakarta: P215 UNY Sapriya. (2007). Konsep Dasar IPS. Bandung: Laboratorium Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan Jurusan PKN FPIPS Shoimin, A. 2014. 68 Model Pembelajaran Inovatif dalam Kurikulum 2013. Yogyakarta : Ar-Ruzz Media. Jurnal: Lailly, N. R. (2015) “Analisis Soal Tipe Higher Order Thinking Skill (HOTS) Dalam Soal UN Kimia SMA Rayon B Tahun 2012/2013” Jurnal Kaunia Vol. XI No. 1, April 2015 Prasetyani, E. DKK (2016) ”Kemampuan Berpikir Tingkat Tinggi Siswa Kelas XI Dalam Pembelajaran Trigonometri Berbasis Masalah (Di SMA Negeri 18 Palembang)” JURNAL GANTANG Pendidikan Matematika FKIP - UMRAH Vol. 1 No. 1, Agustus 2016. Sugiarti. 2009. Upaya Meningkatkan Prestasi Belajar Ips Sejarah Dengan Model Pembelajaran Mea (Means Ends Analysis) Time Token Model Pada Siswa Kelas Xi Ipa 1 Sma Negeri 1 Maos Kabupaten Cilacap Tahun2008/2009.[Online]tersedia:http://www. google.com/jurnal.unnes.com/Prestasi belajar IPS-MEA.html. (Diakses 8 Maret 2015).