Peningkatan Hasil Belajar Mahasiswa Melalui Implementasi Model Pembelajaran  STAD dan JIGSAW Ditinjau dari Gaya Belajar

Operianus Mendrofa; Eka Periaman Zai; Indah Wijaya Lase

doi:10.31539/judika.v7i2.12565

Operianus Mendrofa Universitas Nias
Eka Periaman Zai Universitas Nias
Indah Wijaya Lase Universitas Nias

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31539/judika.v7i2.12565

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine; 1) differences in learning outcomes of students who are taught with the STAD and JIGSAW learning models, 2) differences in learning outcomes reviewed by learning styles, 3) interactions between learning models and learning styles on learning outcomes. The population consisted of 2nd semester PGSD students with a sample size of 92 people. Data collection techniques used observation sheets and posttests. Research data were analyzed using a two-way ANOVA approach with the help of SPSS version 27. The results of the study indicate that 1) there are significant differences in learning outcomes taught with the STAD and JIGSAW learning models, 2) there are significant differences in learning outcomes when viewed from learning styles, 3) there is interaction between learning models and learning styles on learning outcomes. This study reveals that there are significant differences in the learning outcomes of students taught with the STAD and JIGSAW learning models, indicating that the effectiveness of the two models is different. Conclusion, The selection of learning models and identification of student learning styles are very important in improving learning outcomes

Keywords: STAD and JIGSAW, Learning Styles and Learning Outcomes.

References

Aslan Berzener, Ü., & Deneme, S. (2021). The Effect of Cooperative Learning on EFL Learners’ Success of Reading Comprehension: An Experimental Study Implementing Slavin’s STAD Method. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 20(4), 90–100. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1313496

Bhat, S., Bhat, S., Raju, R., D’Souza, R., & Binu, K. G. (2020). Collaborative Learning for Outcome Based Engineering Education: A Lean Thinking Approach. Procedia Computer Science, 172(2019), 927–936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.05.134

Desnita, D., Kartikowati, R. S., & Makhdalena, M. (2021). Application of Stad Type Learning Models to Improve Activity and Student Learning Outcomes. Journal of Educational Sciences, 5(1), 119. https://doi.org/10.31258/jes.5.1.p.119-129

Einstein, A. (2023). Teaching students how to learn. Educational Utopias, 227. https://doi.org/10.26116/7af3-n693

Essa, S. G., Celik, T., & Human-Hendricks, N. E. (2023). Personalized Adaptive Learning Technologies Based on Machine Learning Techniques to Identify Learning Styles: A Systematic Literature Review. IEEE Access, 11(April), 48392–48409. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3276439

Fallace, T. (2023). The long origins of The Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Learning Style typology, 1921–2001. History of Psychology.

Fu, Q. K., Zou, D., Xie, H., & Cheng, G. (2024). A review of AWE feedback: Types, Learning Outcomes, and Implications. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 37(1–2), 179–221. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09588221.2022.2033787

Heebkaew, C., & Seehamongkon, Y. (2024). The Development of the Ability to Solve Mathematical Problems and Academic Achievement Decimal Problem of Prathomsuksa6 Students Through Cooperative Learning Management STAD and KWDL Technique. Journal of Education and Learning, 13(1), 150. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v13n1p150

Jaya, M. G. B. M. (2022). Improving Student’s Understanding of Anatomy in Dance Subject Through Students Team Achievement Divisions (STAD). http://www.ifpri.org/themes/gssp/gssp.htm%0Ahttp://files/171/Cardon - 2008 - Coaching d’équipe.pdf%0Ahttp://journal.um-surabaya.ac.id/index.php/JKM

Luwiti, S. R., Mahmud, M., & Panigoro, F. (2023). Analysis of Stad and Jigsaw Cooperative Learning: a Recommendation for Classroom Practices. Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, Dan …, 13(3), 105–141. https://ejurnal.ung.ac.id/index.php/JBSP/article/view/24615

Nuryani, N., Musyafaah, N., Unsi, B. T., & Nuha, M. A. U. (2023). Student Team Achievement Division (STAD) and Cooperative Learning Model in Balaghah Learning. An Nabighoh, 25(1), 19. https://doi.org/10.32332/an-nabighoh.v25i1.6446

Padalia, A., Jamilah, A., Yatim, H., Alimuddin, A., Handayaningrum, W., & Rahayuningtyas, W. (2022). Increasing Activeness and Learning Outcomes at the University by Applying the STAD Method to Learning. Nternational Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 9(2), 129–139. oi.org/10.18415/ijmmu.v9i2.3350

Parvez, N., Kalsoom, T., & Zawar, S. (2023). An Assessment of Students Per formance According to their Learning Styles at A / O Level. Human Nature Journal of Social Sciences, 4(3), 147–154. https://doi.org/10.71016/hnjss/7bp74d58

Rafiq, H., Aziz, S., & Shahzadi, I. (2024). Exploring the Effectiveness of Fleming's Multi -Sensory Visual , Auditory Kinesthetic Technique to Teach Vocabulary at Primary Level. Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review, 8(3), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.47205/plhr.2024(8-III)10

Rizvi, S., Waite, J., & Sentance, S. (2023). Artificial Intelligence Teaching and Learning in K-12 from 2019 to 2022: A systematic literature review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4(100145).

Sari, S. M., Syafril, S., & Ishak, N. M. (2024). Learning Style Analysis of Gifted and Talented Children. KINDERGARTEN: Journal of Islamic Early Childhood Education, 7(1), 41–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.24014/kjiece.v7i1.29428

Shi, Y., Yang, H., Dou, Y., & Zeng, Y. (2023). Effects of Mind Mapping-Based Instruction on Student Cognitive Learning Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis. Asia Pacific Education Review, 24(3), 303–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-022-09746-9

Sirait, R. W., Sirait, S. H. K., & Jeni, J. (2024). Implementation of STAD Learning Model to Improve Students’ Learning Outcomes. Journal of Research in Instructional, 4(1), 59–66. https://doi.org/10.30862/jri.v4i1.317

Subiyantari, A. R., Muslim, S., & Rahmadyanti, E. (2019). Effectiveness of Jigsaw Cooperative Learning Models in Lessons of the Basics of Building Construction on Students Learning ’Outcomes Viewed From Critical Thinking Skills. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Studies, 1(7), 691–696. https://doi.org/10.29103/ijevs.v1i7.1653

Tania, R., Pahmi, S., Hopeman, T. A., & Minasyan, S. (2024). Impact of the STAD Model on Motivating Math Learning in Addition and Subtraction. Union: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Matematika, 12(1), 173–186. https://doi.org/10.30738/union.v12i1.15936

Ventista, O. M., & Brown, C. (2023). Teachers’ Professional Learning and Its Impact on Students’ Learning Outcomes: Findings from A Systematic Review. Social Sciences and Humanities Open, 8(1), 100565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100565

Zuana, M. M. M., Rumfot, S., Aziz, F., Handayani, E. S., & Lestari, C. (2023). The Influence of Learning Styles (Visual, Kinesthetic and Auditory) on the Independence of Elementary Students’ Learning. Journal on Education, 5(3), 7952–7957. https://doi.org/10.31004/joe.v5i3.1585