The Development of Social Learning Model Based on Metacognitive Strategies to Foster Mathematics Self-Efficacy of Senior High School Students 9 Makassar, Indonesia
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
Makassar State University, INDONESIA
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Ramlan Mahmud   

UNIVERSITAS NEGERI MAKASSAR, KOMP. REGENCY FAJAR MAS BLOK C/4, 90222 MAKASSAR, Indonesia
Online publish date: 2017-07-31
Publish date: 2017-07-31
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2017;13(8):4873–4883
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
The research aims at finding out how the development of social learning model based on metacognitive strategies or PS MEDIM model fosters the mathematics self-efficacy of students which is valid, practical, and effective. In order to obtain the valid, practical, and effective model, instruments and learning tools are well developed. The product of this research is a social learning model based on metacognitive strategies that can foster self-efficacy in mathematics. The development is conducted simultaneously. When developing the model, instruments and tools that support learning model of PS MEDIM are also developed. This research is research development (developmental research) which refers to the modification of the development of Tjeerd Plomp model with 4 phases of development. The first phase is a preliminary investigation. The second phase is designing. The third phase is realization. The fourth phase testing, evaluation, and revision. There is also a trial test of PS MEDIM learning model that is conducted in class XI IPA1 and XI IPA2 of SMAN 9 Makassar. There are some results of the research. First, the model, instruments, and the learning tools of PS MEDIM are valid. Second, the model of PS MEDIM is eligible to apply in the classroom. Third, the model of PS MEDIM does not meet the criteria of practicality. It indicates that the components of the model of PS MEDIM has not been implemented as expected and does not meet the criteria of effectiveness. From 4 criteria of effectiveness, there is only one criterion fulfilled. The students’ positive response to the learning model of PS MEDIM, and other three criteria have not been met. The classical completeness is not reached. The student's activity has not been as expected. In addition, the teacher's ability for teaching and learning management is still in “medium” category.
 
REFERENCES (42)
1.
Arends, & Richard, I. (2001). Learning to Teach. Fifth Edition. Singapore: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
 
2.
Anderson, & Krathwohl. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing. College Education, Ohio University Press.
 
3.
Astutik. (2003). Tes prestasi, fungsi dan pengembangan pengukuran prestasi belajar. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
 
4.
Azwar, S. (1997). Validitas dan reliabilitas. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
 
5.
Bandura, A. (1997). Exercise of personal and collective efficacy inchaning societies. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
 
6.
Dimyati, & Mudjiono. (2009). Perkembangan peserta didik. Jakarta: Universitas Terbuka.
 
7.
Dryden, & VOS. (1999). Role-playing methods in the classroom. Chicago: Science Research Associates.
 
8.
Elliot, Kratochwill, Cook, & dan Traver. (2000).
 
9.
Elaina & Sheila. (1990). Psychology of adjustment and competence (an applied approach). Journal of Psychology.
 
10.
Flavel, N. (1992). Metakognition Learning. Journal. Department of Curriculum, University of Maryland, USA.
 
11.
Ghufron. (2010). Teori kepribadian. Jakarta: Salemba Humanika.
 
12.
Hudoyo. (1990). Model-model dalam Mengajar. Bandung: Diponegoro.
 
13.
Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Showers, B. (1992). Models of Teaching. Fourth Edition. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
 
14.
Kogan. (1973). Peer Clinical Supervision: Theory vs. Reality. Journal Educational Leadership, Springer, USA.
 
15.
Kartono, K. (1992). Psikologi anak. Bandung: Penerbit Alumni.
 
16.
Maonde. (2011). Psikologi kepribadian. Edisi: Revisi. Malang:UMM Press.
 
17.
Meiztasari. (2008). Penyusunan skala psikologi. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
 
18.
Mukhid. (2009). Perkembangan anak. Jilid I. Jakarta: Erlangga.
 
19.
Mahardikawati. (2012). Pembelajaran Efektif. Jakarta: Erlangga.
 
20.
Nieven. (1999). Educational Design Research. University of Twente, Netherlands.
 
21.
Neryll, J., & Catnwell, R. H. (2002). Self-efficacy issues in learning to teach composition: A case study of instruction. Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, 2, 33-41.
 
22.
Ormrod. (2008). Academic self-efficacy among African American youths: Implications for school social work practice. Journal Children and Schools, 27(1), 5-14.
 
23.
Rezzetidan. (1992). Method for effective teaching, second edition. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
 
24.
Ratumanan. (2002). Pengantar Penelitian Ilmiah Dasar, Metode dan Teknik.Bandung: Tarsito.
 
25.
Rizvi. (2000). Shaping Strategy: The Civil-military Politics of Strategic Assessment. Pakistan and Turkey. The Economics Journal.
 
26.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(4), 4-14.
 
27.
Sartika. (2005). Model Pembelajaran Menciptakan Proses Belajar Mengajar yang Kreatif dan Efektif. Jakarta: PT. Bumi Aksara.
 
28.
Schunk. (1994). Learning of Theories. Releight, North America.
 
29.
Slameto. (2003). Teknik penyusunan skala pengukuran. Yogyakarta: Pusat Penelitian Kependudukan. Universitas Gadjah Mada.
 
30.
Soedjadi, R. (1999/2000). Kiat Pendidikan Matematika di Indonesia. Jakarta: Dirjen Dikti Depdikbud.
 
31.
Suhaenah Suparno, A. (2000). Membangun Kompetensi Belajar. Jakarta: Dirjen Dikti Depdiknas.
 
32.
Suherman, & Erman dkk. (2001). Strategi Pembelajaran Matematika Kontemporer (Common Textbook). Bandung: Penerbit JICA-UPI.
 
33.
Santrock, J. W. (2003). Perkembangan rentang masa hidup. Jakarta: Erlangga.
 
34.
Thomas. (1990). Using an academic self-efficacy scale to address university major persistence. Journal of college student development.
 
35.
Wijaya, T. (2009). Analisis Data Penelitian menggunakan SPSS, Universitas. Atma Jaya, Yogyakarta.
 
36.
Winataputra. (2008). Strategi Belajar Mengajar. Pustaka Setia: Bandung.
 
37.
Weiten. W. (1992). Psychology: Theme and variations. (Second ed). California: Books Cole Publishing Company.
 
38.
Winkel, (1996). Psikologi Pengajaran. Edisi Revisi, Jakarta: Grasindo.
 
39.
Warsito. (2004). Dinamika Administrasi Publik, Analisis Empiris Seputar Isu-isu Kontemporer dalam Administrasi Publik. Yogyakarta: Putaka Pelajar.
 
40.
Widarnati, & Indati. (2002). Efektivitas Pelatihan AMT (Achievement Motivation Training) Dengan Pendekatan Spiritual Terhadap Peningkatan Efikasi Diri Mahasiswa Tingkat Awal Dalam Penyesuaian Akademik. Tesis. UIN Yogyakarta.
 
41.
Yuyun. (2010). Pola asuh orangtua, percaya diri dan penyesuaian sosial remaja. Tesis. Surabaya: Universitas 17 Agustus 1945.
 
42.
Zulkofsky. (2009). 30 menit mengenal cara belajar efektif di perguruan tinggi. Solo: Pondok Edukasi.
 
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215