|
Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies Volume 3 Number 4, April, 2023 p- ISSN 2775-3735-
e-ISSN 2775-3727 |
||
|
|
|
|
|
EFFORTS TO IMPROVE LEARNING QUALITY FOR CIVIL STUDY ON UNITY IN
DIVERSITY THROUGH THE TEAM GAME TOURNAMENT (TGT) METHOD IN CLASS IV
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ABSTRACT |
|
|
|
The purpose of the
srudy are; (1) to describe the application of the Teams Games Tournament (TGT)
learning model, and (2) to determine the improvement in the quality of learning through TGT Model. This research method is
qualitative. It was found that 1) student test results in cycle I
meeting 1 obtained an average student test result of 55.42 with a
completeness percentage of 25%, cycle I meeting 2 obtained an average student
test result of 63.33 with a completeness percentage of 38%, cycle II meeting
1 obtained an average student test result of 72.50 with a completeness
percentage of 54%, cycle II meeting 2 obtained an average student test result
of 85.83 with a completeness percentage of 100%, shows a significant increase in
achievement. 2) The application of cooperative learning through TGT can
improve the quality of student civic education learning outcomes. The average
score of students' test results each cycle has increased. In cycle I meeting
1 obtained an average student test result of 55.42 with a completeness
percentage of 25%, cycle I meeting 2 obtained an average student test result
of 63.33 with a completeness percentage of 38%, cycle II meeting 1 obtained
an average student test result of 72.50 with a completeness percentage of
54%, cycle II meeting 2 obtained an average student test result of 85.83 with
a completeness percentage of 100%,
shows a significant increase in achievement. |
|
|
|
KEYWORDS |
civics; learning quality; team games tournament |
|
|
|
This work is licensed under a Creative
Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International |
|
INTRODUCTION
Citizenship Education (Civics) for most students is a subject that
receives less attention (Ananda, 2017). The results of a simple assessment conducted by
researchers at the beginning of each year, if there is a question about which
subjects students like, then almost 60% of students answer other than
Citizenship Education subjects.
This fact continues to the process of teaching and learning activities.
This is shown by the attitude of the students who are mostly less enthusiastic
when the lesson will take place, the low response from students to questions
and teacher explanations and the lack of focus on the lesson, most of the
students are passive, they do not dare to talk about what is and is not known,
their concepts are right or wrong it is difficult for the teacher to know, even
though the teacher has tried to explain the material as much as possible (Nurgiansah et al., 2021).
However, it turns out that the results are not optimal, this is
indicated by the learning completeness which is still low (Mulyani, 2012). The results of other observations are the lack of
quality of learning in learning citizenship education, including: 1) Students'
interest in civics education is low, 2) Students' ability is low, 3) Students
think civics education is a rote lesson, 4) Students are not actively involved,
5) Teachers lack of carrying out variations of learning activities, 6) Support
from family at home is lacking (Sulfemi, 2019). Overcoming the lack of quality of students in civics
education lessons, efforts are needed to improve quality by providing
variations in cooperative learning models that are interesting or fun, which
involve students and can increase student activity and responsibility (Asmani, 2016).
There are many learning models that can be applied
in the teaching and learning process. One of them is a learning model with the
type "Teams Games Tournament" or commonly abbreviated as TGT (Muslim, 2012). In TGT students play games
with members of other teams to get scores for their respective teams (Hamzah, 2021). With a game atmosphere in learning, it is hoped that it will be interesting
and cause a reactive effect in student learning. Learning activities with games
designed in the cooperative learning model with the TGT type allow students to
learn more relaxed while fostering responsibility, cooperation, healthy
competition and learning involvement (Hasanah & Himami, 2021).
Based on the description above, efforts to improve
the quality of learning and student achievement in class IV-C SDN Perigi 01
will be carried out by research entitled "Efforts to Improve the Quality
of Civics Learning Material Unity and Unity in Diversity through the Team Game
Tournament (TGT) Method for Class IV Students -C at SDN Perigi 01 for the
2019/2020 academic year.
The purpose of the srudy are; (1) to describe the
application of the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) learning model in improving the
quality of Civics learning on unity in diversity in Grade IV Students at SDN
Perigi 01, and (2) to determine the improvement in the quality of learning
Citizenship Education through the Teams Games Tournament learning model (TGT)
Unity in Diversity for Students IV at SDN Perigi 01.
RESEARCH
METHOD
This research method is qualitative. This classroom action research was
conducted on fourth grade students at SDN Perigi 01 Pondok Aren District.
Implementation time in the 2019/2020 Academic Year in the Citizenship Education
subject matter Unity and unity in diversity.
The research design used the Kemmis and Taggart model class action
research with the stages of planning, action, observation, and reflection for
each cycle (Sugiyono, 2017). This research was conducted through three cycles.
To see the quality of learning civics education for Class IV-SDN Perigi 01
Academic Year 2019/2020, observations were made of learning activities carried
out by the researchers themselves and other teachers who served as team
teaching members in the class every day. After conducting reflective
assessments and discussions, actions were determined to improve the quality of
students in learning citizenship education by being treated with a cooperative
learning model with the Teams Games Tournament (TGT) type. This classroom
action research is planned in two cycles in four rounds, each round includes
the following stages; (1) Planning, (2) Acting, (3) Observing, and (4) Reflecting
Data collection technique
Data collection techniques
in this classroom action research include interviews, observation
(observation), namely to find out the situation and process of implementing
teaching and learning activities that take place in class, tests, namely to
obtain data on student learning outcomes, and documentation techniques, namely
to complement the missing data through photos during the learning process take
place as concrete evidence.
Data
analysis
In class action research (PTK) data analysis was directed at finding and
finding efforts made by teachers to improve student learning outcomes,
especially in Civics subjects using the TGT model. Thus the data analysis used
in classroom action research can use quantitative and qualitative analysis.
Quantitative data obtained from learning outcomes and student
activities. Learning outcomes were obtained through tests conducted at the end
of the cycle, while student activity data were obtained from observations in
Civics learning activities using the TGT model. The statistical formula used to
process learning outcomes
Information :
x = average score
Σx = total student
score
ΣN = number of
students
To calculate the percentage
of learning outcomes and student activity using the following formula.
Calculation of results and student learning activities are interpreted
in the following criteria (Poerwanti et al, 2008).
Table 1. Learning
Outcome Criteria
|
Mark |
Criteria |
|
80-100 |
Excelent |
|
70-79 |
Very good |
|
60-69 |
Good |
|
80-100 |
Fair |
|
0-49 |
Poor |
Table 2. Learning Activity Criteria
|
Mark |
Criteria |
|
80%-100% |
Excelent |
|
70%-79% |
Very good |
|
60%-69% |
Good |
|
50%-59% |
Fair |
|
0%-49% |
Poor |
Qualitative data is data in the form of information in the form of
sentences whose purpose is to describe a lesson activity. Qualitative data in
this study were obtained from observations that were analyzed descriptively so
that data was obtained regarding teacher and student activities in
participating in Civics learning using the TGT model.
Success Criteria
The TGT model is said to be successful in improving Civics learning
outcomes in class IV-C students at Pondok Kacang Timur 03 Elementary School if
≥75% of the total students score ≥75.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
In the
pre-action it was found that the results of the students' tests on the Civics
subject matterunity
and oneness in diversity in class IV-C students of Pondok Kacang Timur 03
Elementary School 03 for the 2019/2020 Academic Year before the action only
obtained an average score of 52 with a complete learning result of 23%. So
researchers are looking for solutions to efforts to improve the quality of
Civics learning through the Team Game Tournament (TGT) method on unity and
unity in diversity in class IV students at SDN Perigi 01 Academic Year
2019/2020.
Action Cycle 1 Meeting 1
Learning
activities in cycle I meeting 1 were carried out for 2 hours of lessons.
Action
Planning and Preparation
The planning and preparation of the actions carried
out by the researcher included: (1) Preparing the Learning Implementation Plan (RPP),
(2) Preparing the steps in the TGT learning model, (3) Preparing the learning
observation sheet, (4) Preparing LKS, (5) Preparing question cards for
tournaments, and (6) Prepare blank scores on each group table and blank group
scores.
Action
Implementation
The implementation of learning activities in cycle I
meeting 1 was carried out in the following steps: (1) The teacher explained the
material, (2) Students formed study groups and discussed, (3) Games (game
tournaments), and (4) Awards to groups.
At this stage, learning
activities begin by explaining material about "Unity and Unity in
Diversity" using the TGT method. At the end of the explanation the teacher
gives the opportunity for students to ask again about material that is not
understood before the group discussion activities are carried out.
After the delivery of the
material was completed, the students were grouped into 6 groups with 4 students
each in accordance with the format for forming student study groups that had
been determined in the pre-activity. Then the teacher distributes student
worksheets (LKS) on Unity and unity in diversity for each group to discuss. After the
group discussion is over, a tournament is held with the following steps
(rules):
1)
Each group member gets the numbering 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, 6 which is placed on their chest. This numbering is then used to
determine which team members will play at which tournament table. For example
in group 3, one of the members who is given the subject code 01 is given the
number 1 by the teacher, this means that subject 01 will play at the tournament
table 1, subject 05 is given the number 5, meaning that he will play at the
tournament table 5, and so on.
2)
The other groups are also numbered by the
teacher, so that all team members who get number 1 will play at tournament
table 1, those who get number 2 will play at tournament table 2, and so on.
3) Each
tournament table consists of 4 people who are representatives of their
respective groups. In each game table, efforts are made so that no participants
come from the same group.
4)
Each player in
each table first determines the question reader, score writer and the first
player to answer the question by drawing lots. Then the player who wins the
lottery takes a lottery card containing the question number and gives it to the
question reader. For variations, the questions can be randomized in advance by
the question reader. The question reader will read the question according to
the lottery number drawn by the player. Furthermore, the questions are done independently
by the players and challengers according to the time specified in the
questions.
5)
After the time to work on the questions is
over, the player will read out the results of his work which will be responded
to by the challenger clockwise. After that the question reader will unlock the
answer and the score will only be given to the player who answered correctly or
the challenger who first gave the correct answer.
6)
If all players answer incorrectly then the
card is left alone. The game continues on the next question card until all the
question cards have been read out, in which the position of the players is
rotated clockwise so that each participant in one tournament table can act as a
question reader, score writer, player and challenger. (Here the game can be
done many times with the condition that each participant must have the same
opportunity as a player, score writer, challenger, and question reader).
7)
After all cards have been answered or due
to time running out, each player in one table counts the number of cards
obtained and determines the score obtained based on the table provided.
8)
Then each player returns to his original
group.
After the
game ends, the group score is calculated to award the group. The group awards
with criteria such as the following table:
Table 3. Group
Award Criteria
|
Group Value |
Predicate |
|
80 to 85 |
Fair Team |
|
86 to 89 |
Good Team |
|
90 and above |
Very Good Team |
Observation
Implementation of observing the learning process in
this cycle, most of the students enthusiastically participated in learning,
this can be seen from the number of students who responded to each question
posed by the teacher regarding the material being taught, namely the material
Unity and unity in diversity. Another thing that makes students enthusiastic,
from the previous notification that later in this lesson there will be game
activities. Some students even asked game researchers what made them curious.
In group discussions there was a lack of cooperation
from each member of the group, even though in the competition activities
(tournament) students seemed active and enthusiastic in answering questions. In
the match it looked less orderly, this was because many students did not
understand the steps or rules of the competition so that many students asked
the teacher the meaning of the steps they were carrying out. The evaluation
results obtained by students after implementing the TGT learning model showed a
test score of 55.42 with an average learning completeness of 25% and results of
observations of group collaboration 80, group skills 78, problem solving 80,
and material mastery 82 with an average 80.
Implementation of observing the learning process in
this cycle, the teacher also received attention because the teacher made a
major contribution to the success of the teacher's learning strategy in the
learning process to get results as shown in the following table.
Table 4. Teacher Observation Results
|
Observed aspect |
Indicator |
Yes/ No |
|
Initial activity |
1.
Starting the lesson |
Yes |
|
2.
Do apperception |
Yes |
|
|
Core activities |
Application of the TGT
Model |
|
|
a.
Phase 1: Delivering the goal |
Yes |
|
|
b.
Phase 2: Delivering information |
No |
|
|
c.
Phase 3 : Organize students into cooperative groups |
Yes |
|
|
d.
Phase 4: Guiding work and study groups |
Yes |
|
|
e.
Phase 5 : Evaluation |
|
|
|
f.
Phase 6: Giving awards |
No |
|
|
Clossing activities |
3.
Summarize the subject matter. |
Yes |
|
4.
Giving motivation |
No |
|
|
5.
Closing the lesson |
Yes |
|
From the table above, almost all indicators have been
carried out by the teacher during the learning process, it's just that the
teacher did not convey detailed information on learning methods, did not give
awards to competent students, and did not provide motivation at the end of
learning, when asked by the observer because the time allocation had not been
accurate. While the results of student tests carried out after learning in
cycle I meeting 1 were completed can be described in the following table.
Table 5. Student Test Scores
|
No |
Description |
Cycle I P2 |
Information |
|
1 |
Average |
55,42 |
Not Completed |
|
2 |
% complete |
25% |
Not Completed |
|
3 |
N Max |
80 |
|
|
4 |
N Min |
30 |
|
|
5 |
Complete |
6 |
Reflection
From the results of observations regarding group
discussions, it was seen that there was a lack of cooperation from each member
of the group. The researcher and teacher observer concluded that this was
because there were some members who were less enthusiastic about learning, this
was indicated by the results of observations of student learning. The results
of observing the learning quality of student learning in the first cycle of
meeting 1 showed that there was a quality of students with less criteria of
55.42, with a learning completeness percentage of only 25%. This shows that as
many students in class IV-C have less quality learning outcomes.
The results of the teacher's observations showed that
almost during the learning process the teacher did not convey detailed
information on learning methods, did not give awards to competent students, and
did not provide motivation at the end of the lesson, when asked by the observer
because the time allocation was not accurate.
The results of observations regarding game activities,
it can be seen that some students still do not understand the rules (steps) of
the game, that is why in cycle I meeting 1 the teacher plans to give a detailed
explanation of the game steps, and the teacher acts more as a motivator both in
group discussions and in game activities.
Cycle I Meeting 2
Learning
activities in cycle I Meeting 2 were carried out for 2 hours of lessons.
Action
Planning and Preparation
The planning and preparation of the actions carried
out by the researcher included: (1) Preparing the Learning Implementation Plan
(RPP), (2) Preparing the steps in the TGT learning model, (3) Preparing the
learning observation sheet, (4) Preparing LKS, (5) Preparing question cards for
tournaments, and (6) Prepare blank scores on each group table and blank group
scores.
Action
Implementation
Learning implementation activities in cycle I meeting
2 are carried out in one meeting with the following steps: (1) The teacher
explains the material, (2) Students form study groups and discuss, (3) Games
(game tournaments), and (4) Awards to the group.
At this stage, learning
activities begin by explaining material about Unity and unity in diversity with
the TGT method. At the end of the explanation the teacher gives the opportunity
for students to ask again about material that is not understood before the
group discussion activities are carried out.
After the delivery of the
material was completed, the students were grouped into 6 groups with 4 students
each in accordance with the format for forming student study groups that had
been determined in the activity plan. Then the teacher distributes worksheets
on Unity and unity in diversity for each group to discuss. After the
group discussion is over, a tournament is held with the following steps
(rules):
1)
Each group member gets the numbering 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, 6, which is attached to their chest. This numbering is then used to
determine which team members will play at which tournament table. For example
in group 1, one of the members who is given the subject code 01 is given the
number 1 by the teacher, this means that subject 01 will play at the tournament
table 1, subject 04 is given the number 4, meaning that he will play at the
tournament table 4, and so on.
2)
The other groups are also numbered by the
teacher, so that all team members who get number 1 will play at tournament
table 1, those who get number 2 will play at tournament table 2, and so on.
3) Each
tournament table consists of 4 people who are representatives of their
respective groups. In each game table, efforts are made so that no participants
come from the same group.
4)
Each player in
each table first determines the question reader, score writer and the first
player to answer the question by drawing lots. Then the player who wins the
lottery takes a lottery card containing the question number and gives it to the
question reader. For variations, the questions can be randomized in advance by
the question reader. The question reader will read the question according to
the lottery number drawn by the player. Furthermore, the questions are done
independently by the players and challengers according to the time specified in
the questions.
5)
After the time to work on the questions is
over, the player will read out the results of his work which will be responded
to by the challenger clockwise. After that the question reader will unlock the
answer and the score will only be given to the player who answered correctly or
the challenger who first gave the correct answer.
6)
If all players answer incorrectly then the
card is left alone. The game continues on the next question card until all the
question cards have been read out, in which the position of the players is
rotated clockwise so that each participant in one tournament table can act as a
question reader, score writer, player and challenger. (Here the game can be
done many times with the condition that each participant must have the same
opportunity as a player, score writer, challenger, and question reader).
7)
After all cards have been answered or due
to time running out, each player in one table counts the number of cards
obtained and determines the score obtained based on the table provided.
8)
Then each player returns to his original
group.
Observation
Implementation of observing the learning process in
cycle I meeting 2, students looked enthusiastic about participating in
learning, this can be seen from the number of students who responded to each
question posed by the teacher regarding the material being taught, namely the
material "Unity and Unity in Diversity". Another thing that makes
students enthusiastic, from the previous notification that later in this lesson
there will be game activities. Some students even asked the researcher that the
game would be more exciting than before, which made them curious.
Group discussions showed quite good cooperation from
each member of the group, and in the competition activities (tournament)
students seemed active and enthusiastic in answering questions. The competition
looks more orderly than before, this is because many students have started to
understand the steps or rules of the competition. The evaluation results
obtained by students after implementing the TGT learning model showed a test
score of 63.33 with an average learning completeness of 38% while the results
of group collaboration observations obtained an average value of 77
cooperation, 74 group skills, 78 problem solving, and mastery material 76 with
an overall average indicator of 76.25.
Implementation of observing the learning process in
this cycle, the teacher also received attention because the teacher made a
major contribution to the success of the teacher's learning strategy in the
learning process to get results as shown in the following table.
Table 6. Teacher Observation Results
|
Observed aspect |
Indicator |
Yes/ No |
|
Initial activity |
1.
Starting the lesson |
Yes |
|
2.
Do apperception |
Yes |
|
|
Core activities |
3.
Application of the TGT Model |
|
|
a.
Phase 1: Delivering the goal |
No |
|
|
b.
Phase 2: Delivering KBM information |
Yes |
|
|
c.
Phase 3 : Organize students into cooperative groups |
Yes |
|
|
d.
Phase 4: Guiding work and study groups |
Yes |
|
|
e.
Phase 5 : Evaluation |
|
|
|
f.
Phase 6: Giving awards |
No |
|
|
Clossing activities |
4.
Summarize the subject matter. |
Yes |
|
5.
Giving motivation |
Yes |
|
|
6.
Closing the lesson |
Yes |
|
From the table above, almost all indicators have been
carried out by the teacher during the learning process, it's just that the
teacher forgot to give awards and convey learning objectives when asked by the
observer because the teacher forgot to be preoccupied with student questions.
While the results of student tests carried out after learning in cycle I
meeting 2 were completed, can be described in the following table.
Table 7. Student
Test Results
|
No |
Description |
Cycle II P1 |
Information |
|
1 |
Average |
63,33 |
Not Completed |
|
2 |
% complete |
38% |
Not Completed |
|
3 |
N Max |
80 |
|
|
4 |
N Min |
40 |
|
|
5 |
complete |
9 |
Reflection
From the results of observations regarding group
discussions, it was seen that the cooperation of each group member was quite
good, the researcher and the observer teacher concluded that there were some
members who still did not understand the learning material and games in
learning, this was indicated by the results of student observations and the
quality of student learning. The results of observing the learning quality of
student learning in cycle I meeting 2 showed an increase compared to the
previous meeting, student activity with sufficient criteria was 76.25. This shows
that the activities of all students in class IV have good quality.
The results of observations regarding game activities,
it was seen that some students were still unsure about the steps of the game,
that's why at this meeting the teacher gave a detailed explanation of the game
steps, and the teacher played more of a role as a motivator both in group
discussions and in subsequent game activities. The results of the student
evaluation showed a class average of 63.33 with an average percentage of 38% in
the unfinished category, which means that further action is needed.
Cycle II Meeting 1
Learning
activities in cycle II Meeting 1 were carried out for 2 hours of lessons.
Action
Planning and Preparation
The planning and preparation of the actions carried
out by the researcher included: (1) Preparing the Learning Implementation Plan
(RPP), (2) Preparing the steps in the TGT learning model, (3) Preparing the
learning observation sheet, (4) Preparing LKS, (5) Preparing question cards for
tournaments, and (6) Prepare blank scores on each group table and group score
blanks.
Action
Implementation
Learning implementation activities in cycle II meeting
1 are carried out in one meeting with the following steps: (1) The teacher
explains the material, (2) Students form study groups and discuss, (3) Games
(game tournaments), and (4) Awards to the group.
At this stage, learning
activities begin by explaining material about Unity and unity in diversity with
the TGT method. At the end of the explanation the teacher gives the opportunity
for students to ask again about material that is not understood before the
group discussion activities are carried out.
After the delivery of the
material was completed, the students were grouped into 6 groups with 4 students
each in accordance with the format for forming student study groups that had
been determined in the activity plan. Then the teacher distributes worksheets
on Unity and unity in diversity for each group to discuss. After the group discussion is over, a
tournament is held with the following steps (rules):
1)
Each group member gets the numbering 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, 6, which is attached to their chest. This numbering is then used to
determine which team members will play at which tournament table. For example
in group 1, one of the members who is given the subject code 01 is given the
number 1 by the teacher, this means that subject 01 will play at the tournament
table 1, subject 04 is given the number 4, meaning that he will play at the
tournament table 4, and so on.
2)
The other groups are also numbered by the
teacher, so that all team members who get number 1 will play at tournament
table 1, those who get number 2 will play at tournament table 2, and so on.
3) Each
tournament table consists of 4 people who are representatives of their respective
groups. In each game table, efforts are made so that no participants come from
the same group.
4)
Each player in
each table first determines the question reader, score writer and the first
player to answer the question by drawing lots. Then the player who wins the
lottery takes a lottery card containing the question number and gives it to the
question reader. For variations, the questions can be randomized in advance by
the question reader. The question reader will read the question according to
the lottery number drawn by the player. Furthermore, the questions are done
independently by the players and challengers according to the time specified in
the questions.
5)
After the time to work on the questions is
over, the player will read out the results of his work which will be responded
to by the challenger clockwise. After that the question reader will unlock the
answer and the score will only be given to the player who answered correctly or
the challenger who first gave the correct answer.
6)
If all players answer incorrectly then the
card is left alone. The game continues on the next question card until all the
question cards have been read out, in which the position of the players is
rotated clockwise so that each participant in one tournament table can act as a
question reader, score writer, player and challenger. (Here the game can be
done many times with the condition that each participant must have the same
opportunity as a player, score writer, challenger, and question reader).
7)
After all cards have been answered or due
to time running out, each player in one table counts the number of cards
obtained and determines the score obtained based on the table provided.
8)
Then each player
returns to his original group.
Observation
Implementation of observing the learning process in
cycle II meeting 1, students looked enthusiastic about participating in
learning, this can be seen from the number of students who responded to each
question posed by the teacher regarding the material being taught, namely the
material Unity and unity in diversity. Another thing that makes students
enthusiastic, from the previous notification that later in this lesson there
will be game activities. Some students even asked the researcher that the game
would be more exciting than before, which made them curious.
Group discussions showed quite good cooperation from
each member of the group, and in the competition activities (tournament)
students seemed active and enthusiastic in answering questions. The competition
looks more orderly than before, this is because many students have started to
understand the steps or rules of the competition. The evaluation results
obtained by students after implementing the TGT learning model showed a test
score of 72.50 with an average learning completeness of 54% while the results
of observations of group collaboration obtained an average value of cooperation
86, group skills 81, problem solving 84, and mastery material 83 with an
overall average indicator of 83.50.
Implementation of observing the learning process in
this cycle, the teacher also received attention because the teacher made a
major contribution to the success of the teacher's learning strategy in the
learning process to get results as shown in the following table.
Table 8. Teacher
Observation Results
|
Observed aspect |
Indicator |
Yes/ No |
|
Initial activity |
1.
Starting lesson |
Yes |
|
2.
Do apperception |
Yes |
|
|
Core activities |
3.
Application of the TGT Model |
|
|
a.
Phase 1: Delivering the goal |
Yes |
|
|
b.
Phase 2: Delivering KBM information |
Yes |
|
|
c.
Phase 3 : Organize students into cooperative groups |
Yes |
|
|
d.
Phase 4: Guiding work and study groups |
Yes |
|
|
e.
Phase 5 : Evaluation |
|
|
|
f.
Phase 6: Giving awards |
No |
|
|
Clossing activities |
4.
Summarize the subject matter. |
Yes |
|
5.
Giving motivation |
Yes |
|
|
6.
Closing the lesson |
Yes |
|
From the table above, almost all indicators have been
carried out by the teacher during the learning process, it's just that the
teacher forgot to give awards when asked by the observer because the teacher
forgot to be preoccupied with student questions. While the results of student
tests carried out after learning in cycle II meeting 1 were completed can be
described in the following table.
Table 9. Student
Test Results
|
No |
Description |
Cycle II P1 |
Information |
|
1 |
Average |
72.50 |
Not Completed |
|
2 |
% complete |
54% |
Not Completed |
|
3 |
N Max |
90 |
|
|
4 |
N Min |
50 |
|
|
5 |
complete |
13 |
Reflection
From the results of observations regarding group
discussions it was seen that the cooperation had been good from each member of
the group, the researcher and the observer teacher concluded that there were
some members who still did not understand the learning material and games in
learning, this was indicated by the results of student observations and the
quality of student learning. The results of observing the learning quality of
student learning in cycle II meeting 1 showed an increase compared to the
previous meeting, student activity with very good criteria, namely 83.50. This
shows that the activities of all students in class IV have good quality.
The results of observations regarding game activities,
it was seen that some students were still unsure about the steps of the game,
that's why at this meeting the teacher gave a detailed explanation of the game
steps, and the teacher played more of a role as a motivator both in group
discussions and in subsequent game activities. The results of the student
evaluation showed a class average of 72.50 with an average percentage of 54% in
the unfinished category, which means that further improvements are needed.
Cycle II Meeting I
Learning
activities in cycle II meeting 1 were carried out for 2 hours of lessons.
Action
Planning and Preparation
The planning and preparation of the actions carried
out by the researcher include: (1) Develop
a Learning Implementation Plan (RPP) with revisions according to the reflection
of the previous round on the material "Unity and unity in diversity",
(2) Preparing steps in the TGT learning model, (3) Preparing learning
observation sheets, (4) Preparing LKS, (5) Preparing question cards for
tournaments, and (6) Preparing blank scores on each group table and blank group
values.
Action
Implementation
The implementation of learning
activities in Cycle II meeting 2 was carried out in the following steps: (1)
The teacher explained material about Unity and unity in diversity, (2) Students
formed study groups and discussed, (3) Games (game tournaments), and (4) Awards
to the group.
At this stage, learning
activities begin by explaining material about Unity and unity in diversity with
the TGT method. At the end of the explanation the teacher gives the opportunity
for students to ask again about material that is not understood before the
group discussion activities are carried out.
After the delivery of the
material was completed, students were grouped into 6 new groups which were
formed based on formative tests after learning. Then the teacher distributes
worksheets for each group to discuss. After the group discussion is over, a
tournament is held with the following steps (rules):
1)
Each group member gets the numbering 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, and 6 which is determined by the teacher. This numbering is then used
to determine which team members will play at which tournament table. For
example, in group A, one of the members, namely subject 03, is given the number
1 by the teacher, this means that subject 03 will play at the tournament table
1, subject 02 is given the number 2, meaning that he will play at the
tournament table 2, and so on.
2)
The other groups are also numbered by the
teacher, so that all team members who get number 1 will play at tournament
table 1, those who get number 2 will play at tournament table 2, and so on.
3) Each
tournament table consists of 4 people who are representatives of their
respective groups. In each game table, efforts are made so that no participants
come from the same group.
4)
Each player at
each table first determines the question reader and the first player by drawing
lots. Then the player who wins the lottery takes a lottery card containing the
question number and gives it to the question reader. The question reader will
read the question according to the lottery number drawn by the player. Furthermore,
the questions are done independently by the players and challengers according
to the time specified in the questions.
5)
After the time to work on the questions is
over, the player will read out the results of his work which will be responded
to by the challenger clockwise. After that the question reader will unlock the
answer and the score will only be given to the player who answered correctly or
the challenger who first gave the correct answer.
6)
If all players answer incorrectly then the
card is left alone. The game continues on the next question card until all the
question cards have been read out, in which the position of the players is
rotated clockwise so that each participant in a tournament table can play the
role of question reader, player and challenger. (Here the game can be done many
times with the condition that each participant must have the same opportunity
as a player, challenger, and question reader).
7)
After all cards have been answered or time
is up, each player in one table counts the number of cards obtained and
determines the score obtained based on the table provided.
8)
Then each player returns to his original
group.
9)
After the game ends, the group score is
calculated to award the group.
Observation
Implementation of observing the learning process in
cycle II meeting 2, students as a whole enthusiastic about participating in
learning, this can be seen from the number of students who respond to each
question posed by the teacher regarding the material being taught, namely the
material Unity and unity in diversity.
Group discussions showed more active cooperation from
each member of the group compared to cycle I. In the competition activities
(tournament) students seemed active and enthusiastic in answering questions.
Each member of each group already understands the rules of the game very well,
this is evidenced by the smooth running of the game.
At the end of the cycle the teacher distributes
questionnaires to students to reveal the quality of student civics education
learning for the actions given. The evaluation results obtained by students
after implementing the TGT learning model showed a student test score of 85.83
with an average percentage of 100% completeness in class. And the value of the
learning process shows group cooperation 92, group skills 94, problem solving
96, and material mastery 94, with an average of 94.
Implementation of observing the learning process in
this cycle, the teacher also received attention because the teacher made a
major contribution to the success of the teacher's learning strategy in the
learning process to get results as shown in the following table.
Table 10. Teacher
Observation Results
|
Observed aspect |
Indicator |
Yes/ No |
|
Initial activity |
1.
Starting lesson |
Yes |
|
2.
Do apperception |
Yes |
|
|
Core activities |
3.
Application of the TGT Model |
|
|
a.
Phase 1: Delivering the goal |
Yes |
|
|
b.
Phase 2: Delivering KBM information |
Yes |
|
|
c.
Phase 3 : Organize students into cooperative groups |
Yes |
|
|
d.
Phase 4: Guiding work and study groups |
Yes |
|
|
e.
Phase 5 : Evaluation |
|
|
|
f.
Phase 6: Giving awards |
Yes |
|
|
Clossing activities |
4.
Summarize the subject matter. |
Yes |
|
5.
Giving motivation |
Yes |
|
|
6.
Closing the lesson |
Yes |
|
From the table above, all indicators have been
implemented by the teacher well during the learning process and nothing has
been overlooked. While the results of student tests carried out after learning
at this meeting was completed, can be described in the following table.
Table 11. Student
Test Results
|
No |
Description |
Cycle II P2 |
Information |
|
1 |
Average |
85,83 |
complete |
|
2 |
% complete |
100% |
complete |
|
3 |
N Max |
100 |
|
|
4 |
N Min |
80 |
|
|
5 |
complete |
24 |
Reflection
The results of observations in the implementation of
the TGT learning model, the available time is accurate, up to game activities,
awarding activities can be carried out, this is because the learning time is
prepared with the right scenario, so researchers and observers agree to fulfill
the time in implementing the TGT learning model in cycle II meeting 2, the
research implementation can be stopped. And the teacher has carried out all the
learning indicators according to the TGT model well in the initial activities,
core activities, and final activities.
From the results of the
evaluation which showed that the student test results were 85.83, and the
average learning completeness was 100%, this meant that they had met the
learning completeness criteria set for the subject, which was 75.
Discussion
The results of this class action researcher obtained
several important discoveries and events which were considered to be able to
influence research, among others. Games in TGT can generate enthusiasm and
enthusiasm for students. During the game the players at each tournament table
who are representatives of the groups look excited to be able to answer the
questions that are read, even before the players who turn to answer, there are
challengers who immediately want to answer (Utami, 2018).
The application of cooperative learning through TGT
can improve the quality of student learning. This is in line with the results
of the study(Love, 2018). Based on the
results of student observations from group work observations, it can be seen
from the research results, namely the observation table of student learning
with TGT in general, the average number of each aspect measured has increased
from cycle I to cycle II.
Indicators of group cooperation, group skills, problem
solving, and mastery of the material, in cycle I meeting 1 obtained an average
of 67.25, cycle I meeting 2 obtained an average of 76.25, cycle II meeting 1
obtained an average of 83.50 , cycle II meeting 2 obtained an average of 94.00
indicating a significant increase in student activity. As described in the
following graph.
Figure 1. TGT
Learning Activity Results Chart
The results of teacher observations also showed an
increase in each cycle, in cycle I almost all indicators had been carried out
by the teacher during the learning process, it was just that the teacher did
not convey detailed learning method information, did not give awards to
competent students, and did not provide motivation at the end of learning. when
asked by the observer because the time allocation was not accurate, in cycle II
almost all the indicators had been carried out by the teacher during the
learning process, it was just that the teacher forgot to give awards when asked
by the observer because the teacher forgot to be preoccupied with student
questions while in cycle II meeting 2 all indicators the teacher has carried
out well during the learning process and nothing has been overlooked.
The application of cooperative learning through TGT
can improve the quality of student citizenship education learning outcomes (Sulistyo, 2016).
The
average value of student test results for each cycle has increased. In the
first cycle meeting 1, the average student test result was 55.42 with a
completeness percentage of 25%, the first cycle meeting 2 obtained an average
student test result of 63.33 with a completeness percentage of 38%, the second
cycle meeting 1 obtained an average result student test 72.50 with a completeness
percentage of 54%, cycle II meeting 2 obtained an average student test result
of 85.83 with a completeness percentage of 100%, indicating a significant
increase in achievement. As described in the following graph.
Figure 2. Student Test Results Chart
CONCLUSION
The conclusions that can be
drawn from the results of this classroom action research (PTK) are; (1) student
test results in cycle I meeting 1 obtained an average student test result of
55.42 with a completeness percentage of 25%, cycle I meeting 2 obtained an
average student test result of 63.33 with a completeness percentage of 38%,
cycle II meeting 1 obtained an average student test result of 72.50 with a
completeness percentage of 54%, cycle II meeting 2 obtained an average student test
result of 85.83 with a completeness percentage of 100%, showing a significant
increase in achievement, and (2) the application of cooperative learning
through TGT can improve the quality of student citizenship education learning
outcomes. The average value of student test results for each cycle has
increased. In the first cycle of meeting 1, the average student test result was
55.42 with a completeness percentage of 25%.
Ananda, R.
(2017). Penggunaan media
audio visual untuk meningkatkan hasil belajar pendidikan kewarganegaraan siswa
kelas IV SD Negeri 016 Bangkinang Kota. Jurnal Basicedu, 1(1),
21–30.
Asmani, J. M.
(2016). Tips Efektif Cooperative Learning:
Pembelajaran Aktif, Kreatif, dan Tidak Membosankan. Diva Press.
Hamzah, Y. K.
(2021). Upaya Meningkatkan Motivasi Dan Prestasi
Belajar Pada Pembelajaran Matematika Melalui Model Pembelajaran Teams Games
Tournament (TGT) Pada Siswa SMA Negeri 2 Gorontalo. Aksara: Jurnal Ilmu
Pendidikan Nonformal, 7(3), 1171–1178.
Hasanah, Z.,
& Himami, A. S. (2021). Model
pembelajaran kooperatif dalam menumbuhkan keaktifan belajar siswa. Irsyaduna:
Jurnal Studi Kemahasiswaaan, 1(1), 1–13.
Haryono, M.
(2007). Penggunaan Variasi Metode
Belajar untuk Membangkitkan Kualitas Belajar Pendidikan kewarganegaraan. Widyatama (4).
Mulyani, S.
(2012). Penggunaan Model
Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Jigsaw untuk Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Pkn. CIVIS:
Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Sosial Dan Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan, 2(1).
Muslim, R. I.
(2012). Upaya Peningkatan
Motivasi Belajar Matematika Menggunakan Metode Kooperatif Tipe Teams Games
Tournament (TGT)(PTK Pembelajaran Matematika di Kelas VIII E SMP Negri 1
Ngemplak Tahun Ajaran 2011/2012). Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta.
Nurgiansah, T.
H., Hendri, H., & Khoerudin, C. M. (2021). Role Playing dalam Pembelajaran Pendidikan Pancasila Dan
Kewarganegaraan. Jurnal Kewarganegaraan, 18(1), 56–64.
Sudijono, A.
(2005). Pengantar Statistika Pendidikan.
PT Raja Grafindo. Jakarta
Sugiyono, P. D.
(2017). Metode penelitian
bisnis: pendekatan kuantitatif, kualitatif, kombinasi, dan R&D. Penerbit
CV. Alfabeta: Bandung, 225.
Sukasih, N. N.
(2018). Penerapan Model
Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Teams Game Tournament (TGT) untuk Meningkatkan
Minat Belajar PKn. Jurnal Ilmiah Sekolah Dasar, 2(3), 256.
Sulfemi, W. B.
(2019). Penerapan model pembelajaran discovery
learning meningkatkan motivasi dan hasil belajar pendidikan kewarganegaraan. Jurnal
Rontal Keilmuan Pancasila Dan Kewarganegaraan, 5(1).
Sulistyo, I.
(2016). Peningkatan motivasi belajar dengan
menerapkan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif TGT pada Pelajaran PKN. Jurnal
Studi Sosial/Journal of Social Studies, 4(1).
Utami, D.
(2018). Pengaruh model
pembelajaran teams games tournament terhadap minat belajar geografi siswa SMA. Jurnal
Swarnabhumi: Jurnal Geografi Dan Pembelajaran Geografi, 3(2), 81–88.
Wardono. (2005). Penerapan Pembelajaran
Kooperatif Jigsaw dan TGT (Teams Games Tournaments) untuk
Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Pendidikan kewarganegaraan pada Siswa SMP.
(Laporan PTK). Semarang.