UNS Conference Portal, The 1st International Conference on Science, Mathematics, Environment and Education 2017

Font Size: 
Experimentation of Teaching Mathematics Using Think Talk Write (TTW) on the Probability of the 11th Grade Senior High School Students in Sukoharjo based on their Emotional Intelligences
Fatimah Fatimah

Last modified: 2017-07-05

Abstract


Extended Abstract

Cooperative learning method has a positive effect on students academic knowledge, performing skills and approach to the lesson and it is more effective than the traditional command method. Cooperative learning model is divided into several types. One of them is Think Talk Write (TTW) model.  In her research, Rahmawati (2014) proposes that “Think Talk Write (TTW) learning model is better than Numbered Heads Together (NHT) learning model and tradisional model. Winata (2014), more emotionally supportive classrooms are associated with better academic achievement, and in classrooms with lower levels of emotional support, children with poor attention tend to have lower achievement. Kalhotra (2012) argues, “those children who have high emotional intelligence will also be high academic achievers”. Besides that, to optimize applying the learning model, the researcher is interested to use the Think Talk Write (TTW) learning model on the probability of the 11th grade senior high school students in Sukoharjo.

The research was a quasi-experimental research. The population consists of all students grade XI in all State Senior High School in Sukoharjo. The sampling techniques was taken by using stratified cluster random sampling. The analysis data technique used was two-way analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The treatment in this research is learning using the TTW model as an experiment class, and direct learning model as a control class.

The prerequisite test results concluded that all the samples were taken from a normal distribution population and the population had the same variance. Furthermore, the balance test found that the samples of the experimental group and the control group were in a state of balance. Then, the hypotheses test was done. The average between cells and average marginal is shown on Table 1. The resume of two-way analysis of variance with different cell is shown in Table 2. Based on the Table 2, it can be concluded that (a) there are differences in the mathematics learning achievement between the students who were subject to the TTW learning model and the direct learning model, (b) there are difference in the mathematics learning achievement among students with high, medium, and low emotional intelligence, (c) there is no interaction between the learning model and the emotional intelligence of the students' the mathematics learning achievement.

 

Table 1: The average between cells and average marginal

Learning Model (A)

Emotional intelligence (B)

Average Marginal

High (b1)

Medium (b2)

Low (b3)

TTW (a1)

67,0000

62,4390

57,4815

62,5600

Direct (a3)

63,0000

54,5714

56,8889

58,0571

Average Marginal

64,8824

58,4578

57,1852

 

 

Table 2: The resume of two way analysis of variance with different cell

Source

SS

df

MS

 

 

Determination

A

856,3426

1

856,3426

6,2981

3,8886

HhhhH0A is rejected

B

2316,4917

2

1158,2458

8,5185

3,0413

H0B is rejected

A*B

438,4649

2

219,2324

1,6124

3,0413

H0AB is accepted

Galat

27057,7907

199

135,9688

 

 

 

Total

30669,0898

204

 

 

 

 

 

(at least 3 table)

References

[1]      Araban, S., Zainalipour, H., Hasan, R., Javdan, M., Sezide, K., & Sajjadi, S. (2012). Study of Cooperative Learning Effects on Self-Efficacy and Academic Achievement in English Lesson of High School Students. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 2 (9), 8524-8526.

[2]      Arends, R. I. (1997). Classroom Instruction and Management. New York: McGraw Hill Companies Inc.

[3]      Huinker, D. Dan Laughlin, C. (1996). Talk Your Way Into Writing. in Portia C. Elliot and Margaret J. Kenney (eds). Yearbook Communication in Mathematics, K-12 and beyond, Reston VA: In The national Council of Teacher of Mathematics Inc.

[4]      Ibrahim. (2011). Peningkatan Kemampuan Komunikasi Penalaran, dan Pemecahan Masalah Matematis Serta Kecerdasan Emosional Melalui Pembelajaran Berbasis Masalah Pada Siswa SMA. A dissertation in PPS UPI. Bandung: unpublished.

[5]      Ibrahim dan Nu’man. (2011). Analisis Kemampuan Berpikir Matematis Tingkat Tinggi dan Kecerdaan Emosional Siswa Madrasah Aliyah Di Kota Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: unpublished.

[6]      Idris, N. (2009). Enhancing Students’ Understanding in Calculus through Writing. International Electronic Journal of Mathematic Education. Vol 4(2): 39-58.

[7]      Kosko, K.W. & Wilkins, J.L.M. (2010). Mathematical Communication and Its Relation to the Frequency of Manipulative Use. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 5 (2).

[8]      Nasir, M. (2012). Emotional Intelligence as A Mediator in The relationship of Cultural Adjustment and Academic Achievement of International Students. Social Sciences and Humanities. Vol. 3. No. 3, pp. 275-280.

[9]      Suminar, R. P. (2015). The Effectiveness of Ttw (Think-Talk-Write) Strategy In Teaching Writing Descriptive Text. Journal of English Language and Learning, 2 (2) 299-304.

[10]  Winata, R. (2014). Eksperimentasi Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Numbered Head Together (NHT) dan Think Pair Share (TPS) dengan Pendekatan Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) pada Materi Persamaan dan pertidaksamaan Linier Satu Variabel Ditinjau dari Kecerdasan Emosional Siswa SMP Negeri Kelas VII di Kabupaten Karanganyar. Tesis. Surakarta: Sebelas Maret University.

[11]  Yahaya, A., Yahaya, N., & Lee, G. M. (2012). The Impact of Emotional Intelligence Element on Academic Achievement. Archives Des Sciences. Vol. 65. No. 4, pp. 1-17.

[12]  Yamin, M. & Ansari, B. I. (2012). Taktik Mengembangkan Kemampuan Individual Siswa. Jakarta: Putra Grafika.

[13]  Zakaria, E. & Iksan Z. (2007). Promoting Cooperative Learning in Science and Mathematic. Eurasia Journal of Mathematic, Sciences & Technology Edu-cation, 6 (2), 35-39.