Eduvest ï¿½ Journal of Universal Studies Volume 2 Number 11, November, 2022 p- ISSN 2775-3735- e-ISSN 2775-3727

IMPROVING STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF A COOPERATIVE LEARNING MODEL WITH A SHOPPING WINDOW SETTING
Lisa Aditya Dwiwansyah Musa, Hardianto, Muhammad Firdaus Nur Institut Agama Islam Negeri (IAIN) Palopo, Indonesia Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
ABSTRACT
This study aims to improve student learning outcomes through the application of cooperative learning models with window shopping settings. This research is a classroom action research conducted in two cycles. The subjects in this study were mathematics education students at one of the tertiary institutions in Palopo City. Data was collected through student activity observation sheets and student learning outcomes tests, which were then processed through descriptive statistics. The results showed that there was an increase in the average score of student learning outcomes from cycle I to cycle II, increased student learning completeness from cycle I to cycle II, and increased student learning activity from cycle I to cycle II, so it can be concluded that the application of the cooperative learning model window shopping settings can improve student learning outcomes
KEYWORDS	Learning, Cooperative Learning Model, Window Shopping
	This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International

INTRODUCTION

Activities and learning outcomes are two important and interrelated things in learning, where student activity in the learning process will determine good learning outcomes (Ismaya & Abduloh, 2015). In line with opinion (Arikunto & Dkk, 2008) that the student learning process is active both physically, mentally and emotionally, in conducive conditions will result in good learning outcomes. Student activities are a series of activities carried out by students in the lecture process that do not conflict with learning objectives, while student learning outcomes are the final abilities that students acquire after carrying out learning activities (Shodiqin, 2011).

Learning will not be carried out properly, if student activities are not as expected, so that student learning outcomes will also be low (Mediawati, 2011). Learning will not be carried out prop erly, if student activities are not as expected, so that student learning outcomes will also be low (Reflina, 2020).

One good learning model to be able to overcome existing problems is through a cooperative learning model with window shopping settings, this is because it can motivate students to play an active role, train student communication, student creativity, so as to improve student learning outcomes (Zam, 2021). In line with the opinion of Johnson and Johnson (Ketut Sudiana, 2012), there are five main elements that must be considered in cooperative learning, namely (1) positive interdependence, (2) increased interaction between students, (3) increased individual responsibility, (4) formation of social skills and abilities, (5) group processes, that is, there is an effective cooperative relationship. So from the above opinion it can be concluded that cooperative learning model is an alternative to be able to increase student learning activities and outcomes in the learning process.

This research is in line with research conducted by (Inganah et al., 2020) This research is in line with research conducted by (Prasetyo, 2021) that the windows shopping learning model can improve student learning outcomes. And in line with research conducted by (Suprapto, 2017) that this window shopping activity is very interesting and fun, because in addition to group work there are also peer tutoring activities. In general, students feel happy doing learning activities outside the classroom, which has an impact on improving student learning outcomes.

The cooperative learning model setting window shopping is group learning by preparing works that will be used in transferring knowledge between groups with the concept of visiting each other's works. In line with the Kurdish opinion (Inganah et al., 2020) The windows shopping learning model is a learning model that has activities around and seeing the results of other groups' work to increase knowledge or exchange ideas. and the opinions of Rasidi and Nuruddin (Prasetyo, 2021) the windows shopping learning model consists of the word windows which means window and shopping which means shopping, this learning model includes cooperative learning by raising activities to see and understand someone's thoughts and vice versa, in this learning model two students will act as peer tutors by explaining the results discussion of material displayed in the form of works that will be displayed and explained to other students, while other group members will do shopping or visit other group places (Prayoga, 2012).

RESEARCH METHOD

The type of research chosen is classroom action research. It is carried out in two cycles, where each cycle consists of four stages, namely planning, implementing, observing, and reflecting. The subjects in this study were students of mathematics education in the third semester of class B with a total of 22 students consisting of 3 boys and 19 girls. The first research procedure carried out was at the planning stage by examining the curriculum that runs in odd semesters, making semester learning plans (RPS), preparing student activity observation sheets and learning achievement tests. The second stage is the implementation stage which is carried out in the learning process with the application of cooperative learning which is set with window shopping. Furthermore, at the observation or observation stage, it is carried out by observing student activities in learning through observation sheets. Then at the reflection stage, namely by carrying out reflection or reviewing the actions that have been taken whether they are appropriate or not. The results obtained from the process of implementation, observation, and the final test of learning outcomes are analyzed to be used as food for thought for determining further actions. For each of these stages, repeated in the second cycle. Data is collected through observation sheets obtained when observing student activities in the learning process, and learning achievement tests at the end of the cycle. Student activity observation data was analyzed using a formula (Hardianto & Musa, 2020):

With: PTa = Percentage of student activity to carry out a type of activity

ï¿½The number of types of activities carried out by students in each meeting

ï¿½ The total number of activities for each meeting

Data in the form of student mathematics learning outcomes were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The categorization of learning outcomes used adjusts to the assessment of the IAIN Palopo mathematics education study program, which is presented in table 1 below.

Tabel 1

Kategori Hasil Belajar

No	range	Category
1	85 ï¿½ 100	Very high
2	70 ï¿½ 84	Tall
3	55 ï¿½ 69	Currently
4	50 ï¿½ 54	Low
5	0 ï¿½ 49	Very low

The measures/indicators of the success of this action are:

1) There was an increase in the average score of student learning outcomes from cycle I to cycle II.

2) Increasing student learning completeness from cycle I to cycle II, where individual completeness is achieved if students obtain a minimum score of 70 and classical completeness is achieved if 85% of students achieve a score of ≥70 from an ideal score of 100.

3) Increased student learning activities from cycle I to cycle II.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

A. Application of Cooperative Learning Model Setting Window Shopping

Learning is carried out in two cycles, where for each stage of the cycle consists of 4 meetings and 1 test of learning outcomes, while the learning steps are carried out using cooperative learning model steps, as follows.

1. Convey goals and prepare students

Starting learning by conveying learning objectives and preparing students, such as asking students' readiness to attend lectures, providing motivation and apperception to students regarding the importance of the material being studied.

2. Presenting information

The lecturer presents information about the material being studied, explains the learning process with window shopping, such as the process of making products where the material is presented as attractively as possible and displayed to be explained to other groups, as well as the process of discussion and presentation of this window shopping learning.

3. Organizing students into study groups

Students are divided into several groups, where each group consists of 4 students, who are divided heterogeneously.

4. Helping teamwork

Figure 1

Work in group

Figure 1 above shows students carrying out group work activities to prepare presentation materials and discuss the material their groups have obtained.

5. Evaluate

Figure 2

Group Presentation/Work Visit

Evaluation activities through group presentations with window shopping settings, namely in one group consisting of 4 students, 2 students stay in their group to explain the results of their group's work, and the other 2 students visit other groups to get material from other groups, so so on for up to 3 rounds, and return to the group to hold discussions by exchanging information.

6. Give awards

Figure 3

Giving Awards

Rewarding activities are activities intended to provide reinforcement in the form of words or goods. In implementing this model, awards are given in the form of words of congratulations for being selected as the best group in window shopping learning and giving pins for courses as a form of prize (Shoffa & Suprapti, 2017).

B. Description of Observation Results of Student Activities Cycle I and Cycle II

The results of observations of student activities at each meeting that were in accordance with the learning process during cycle II also continued to increase, while student activities that were not in accordance with the learning process decreased.

Comparison of the results of observations of student activities at each meeting from cycle I to cycle II can be seen in Figure 4 below:

Figure 4

Comparison of Student Activity Cycle I and Cycle II

(Aktivity A - C)

ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½

ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ Based on Figure 4 student activity at each meeting from cycle I to cycle II in activity A, namely students who paid attention to the lecturer's explanation in the learning process continued to increase from 20 students to 22 students. Furthermore, in activity B, namely students who actively work on work in their groups from cycle I to cycle II, it has increased from 19 students to 22 students, and in activity C, namely students who provide assistance in groups also experienced an increase, namely from 3 students to 16 students.

Figure 5

ï¿½ Comparison of Student Activity Cycle I and Cycle II (Aktivitas D - F)

ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½

Based on Figure 5 student activity at each meeting from cycle I to Cycle II in activity D namely, students who ask questions/answer questions in the learning process have increased from 5 students to 15 students. Furthermore, in activity E, namely students who actively worked on presenting their work from cycle I to cycle II, it increased from 10 students to 22 students. And in Activity F, namely students who concluded the material from cycle I to Cycle II also experienced an increase, namely from 1 student to 15 students. So, it can be concluded that the results of observations of student activities cycle I and cycle II in activity D to activity F have increased.

To find out the development of student activities at each meeting with 6 activities can be seen in table 2 below.

Table 2

Student Activity

Meeting	Student Activity						Amount
Meeting	A	B	C	D	E	F	Amount
1	20	19	3	5	10	1	58
2	20	21	5	10	20	3	79
3	20	22	10	12	20	5	89
4	22	22	10	13	22	6	95
5	22	22	12	15	22	10	103
6	22	22	15	15	22	15	111
7	22	22	16	18	22	15	115
8	22	22	16	22	22	16	120

Table 2 above shows student activity in the learning process starting from meeting 1 to meeting 8 for activity A to activity F. for the percentage of student activity can be seen in table 3 below:

Table 3

Percentage of Student Activity

Meeting			Pta	Cycle	Average (%)
1	58	176	33	I	45,75
2	79	176	45
3	89	176	51
4	95	176	54
5	103	176	59	II	63,75
6	111	176	63
7	115	176	65
8	120	176	68

Figure 6

Comparison of Average Percentage of Student Activity Cycle I and Cycle II

Based on Figure 6 above, the percentage of student activity can be seen that it has increased from cycle I and cycle II, which has increased from 45.75% to 63.75%.

C. Analysis of student learning outcomes in cycle I

In cycle I, a student learning achievement test was carried out through a test whose results can be seen in the following table.

Table 4 ï¿½ Learning Outcomes of Cycle I
	Cycle 1 Learning Outcomes Test	Valid N (listwise)
N	22	22
Range	37
Minimum	60
Maximum	97
Sum	1392
Mean	63.26
Std. Deviation	8.050
Variance	64.809

Based on the table above, it can be seen that the number of students who took the test in cycle I was 22 students with an average learning result of 62.26, the highest score obtained was 97 and the lowest score obtained was 60 out of the total, namely 1392. Standard deviation obtained 8.050 with a variance of 64.809. If student learning outcomes scores are grouped based on learning outcomes categories, then the distribution of learning outcomes scores is obtained as in the following table.

Table 5

Category Learning Outcomes Cycle 1

No	Percentage	Frequency	Range	Category
1	85 ï¿½ 100	1	4,5	Very high
2	70 ï¿½ 84	1	4,5	Tall
3	55 ï¿½ 69	20	91	Currently
4	50 ï¿½ 54	0	0	Low
5	0 ï¿½ 49	0	0	Very low
	Amount	22	100

Based on the table above obtained from 22 students, there is 1 student in the very high category or 4.5%, 1 student in the high category or 4.5%, 20 students are in the medium category or 91%, and 0 students in low and very low categories.

If student learning outcomes in cycle I are analyzed based on student learning completeness, it can be seen in the following table.

Tabel 6

Ketuntasan Belajar Siklus 1

Score Intervals	Frequency	Presentase	Category
70 ï¿½ 100	2	9	complete
0 ï¿½ 69	20	91	Not Completed
Amount	22	100

Based on the table above, it can be seen that the number of students who have completed their studies is 2 people or 9% and those who have not completed their studies are 20 people or 91%. From the results obtained, it can be concluded that in the first cycle, student learning outcomes have not reached classical mastery.

D. Analysis of student learning outcomes in cycle II

In cycle II, a student learning achievement test was carried out through a test whose results can be seen in the following table.

Table 7 ï¿½ Cycle II Learning Outcomes
	Cycle II Learning Outcomes Test	Valid N (listwise)
N	22	22
Range	35
Minimum	65
Maximum	100
Sum	1995
Mean	90.68
Std. Deviation	10.943
Variance	119.751

Based on the table above, it can be seen that the number of students who took the test in cycle II there were 22 students with an average learning outcome of 90.68, the highest score obtained was 100 and the lowest score obtained was 65 out of the total, namely 1995. Standard deviation obtained 10.943 with a variance of 119.751. If student learning outcomes scores are grouped based on learning outcomes categories, then the distribution of learning outcomes scores is obtained as in the following table.

Table 8

Category Learning Outcomes Cycle II

No	Category	Percent	Frequency	Range
1	85 ï¿½ 100	17	77	Very high
2	70 ï¿½ 84	3	14	Tall
3	55 ï¿½ 69	2	9	Currently
4	50 ï¿½ 54	0	0	Low
5	0 ï¿½ 49	0	0	Very low
	Jumlah	22	100

Based on the table above obtained from 22 students, there were 17 students in the very high category or 77%, 3 students in the high category or 14%, 2 students in the medium category or 9%, and 0 students in the low category and very low.

If student learning outcomes in cycle II are analyzed based on student learning completeness, it can be seen in the following table.

Table 9

ï¿½ Mastery Learning Cycle II

Score Intervals	Frequency	Presentase	Category
70 ï¿½ 100	20	91	Complete
0 ï¿½ 69	2	9	Not Complete
Amount	22	100

Based on the table above, it can be seen that the number of students who have completed their studies is 20 people or 91% and those who have not completed their studies are 2 people or 9%. From the results obtained, it can be concluded that in cycle II student learning outcomes achieve classical mastery.

Student learning outcomes can be increased through the application of cooperative learner setting window shopping in line with opinions (Prasetyo, 2021) that learning is done through the application of the windows shopping learning model can improve student learning outcomes. In line with opinion (Inganah et al., 2020) that the window shopping learning model can increase students' interest in learning, with high interest fostering a desire to learn mathematics better, so that it correlates with increased learning outcomes. Student activity in cooperative learning setting window shopping has also increased, in line with opinions (Nengsih, 2022) that the window shopping learning model can increase students' interest in learning, with high interest fostering a desire to learn mathematics better, so that it correlates with increased learning outcomes. Student activity in cooperative learning setting window shopping has also increased, in line with opinions.

CONCLUSION

The application of cooperative learning models with window shopping settings can improve student learning outcomes, this can be seen from the increase in the average score of student learning outcomes from cycle I to cycle II, increasing student learning completeness from cycle I to cycle II, and increasing student learning activities from cycle I to cycle II.

Based on the concluded research results, we suggest that readers, especially lecturers, can take advantage of this type of window shopping cooperative learning in the lecture process to activate students so that it will affect their learning outcomes which of course can increase. For future researchers, it can be used as a reference for the results of this study for further research.

REFERENCES

Arikunto, S., & Dkk. (2008). Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Bumi Aksara.

Hardianto, & Musa, L. A. D. (2020). Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Two Stay Two Stray (Tsts) Terintegrasi Nilai-Nilai Aneka. Journal Of Teaching And Learning Research, 2(2), 13ï¿½26.

Inganah, S., Mumpuni, P. W., & Sugiarti, W. (2020). Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Window Shopping Materi Vektor Untuk Meningkatkan Hasil Dan Minat Belajar Matematika. Jurnal Math Educator Nusantara: Wahana Publikasi Karya Tulis Ilmiah Di Bidang Pendidikan Matematika, 6(2), 115ï¿½126.

Ismaya, B., & Abduloh, A. (2015). Efektifitas Layanan Bidang Bimbingan & Konseling Dalam Meningkatkan Prestasi Belajar Mahasiswa Prodi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Fkip Unsika. Majalah Ilmiah Solusi, 2(05).

Ketut Sudiana, I. (2012). Upaya Pengembangan Soft Skills Melalui Implementasi Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Untuk Peningkatan Aktivitas Dan Hasil Belajar Mahasiswa Pada Pembelajaran Kimia Dasar. Pendidikan Indonesia, 1(2), 91ï¿½101.

Mediawati, E. (2011). Pembelajaran Akuntansi Keuangan Melalui Media Komik Untuk Meningkatkan Prestasi Mahasiswa. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan, 12(1), 68ï¿½76.

Nengsih, S. R. (2022). Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Window Shoping Dalam Meningkatkan Aktivitas Belajar Siswa Pada Materi Bangun Ruang Sisi Lengkung. 3(1), 1ï¿½9.

Prasetyo, A. (2021). Pemanfaatan Model Belajar Window Shopping Dalam Upaya Peningkatan Hasil Belajar. Pedagogika, 12(2), 184ï¿½193.

Prayoga, A. S. (2012). Upaya Peningkatan Kemampuan Lompat Jangkit Melalui Pembelajaran Menggunakan Alat Bantu Pada Mahasiswa Penkepor Jpok Fkip Uns Angkatan 2011.

Reflina, R. (2020). Kesulitan Mahasiswa Calon Guru Matematika Dalam Menyelesaikan Soal Pembuktian Matematis Pada Mata Kuliah Geometri. Jurnal Analisa, 6(1), 80ï¿½90.

Shodiqin, A. (2011). Pembelajaran Matematika Dengan Bantuan Software Mathematica Untuk Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Matematik Mahasiswa Calon Guru Matematika (Studi Eksperimen Pada Mahasiswa Calon Guru Matematika Di Ikip Pgri Semarang). Aksioma: Jurnal Matematika Dan Pendidikan Matematika, 2(1/Maret).

Shoffa, S., & Suprapti, E. (2017). Peningkatan Hasil Belajar Mahasiswa Pada Mata Kuliah Metode Numerik Dengan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Jigsaw. Must: Journal Of Mathematics Education, Science And Technology, 2(2), 178ï¿½188.

Suprapto. (2017). Penerapan Pembelajaran Tsts Dengan Aktifitas Window Shopping Untuk Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Bangun Ruang Sisi Datar. Jurnal E-Dumath, 3(2).

Zam, E. M. (2021). Efektivitas Pembelajaran Mata Pelatihan Pelayanan Publik Dengan Metode Window Shopping Pada Latsar Cpns Kabupaten Kampar. Jurnal Educatio Fkip Unma, 7(3), 574ï¿½582.