Microsoft Word - (final) Ana Yuliana.doc Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE)| p-ISSN 2655-920x, e-ISSN 2656-2804 Vol. 3 (1) (2021) 48-56 48 “Make A Match Model” for Improving the Understanding of Concepts and Student Learning Results “Make A Match Model” for Improving the Understanding of Concepts and Student Learning Results Ana Juliani1, Ali Mustadi2, Intan Lisnawati3 1,2Department of Elementary School Teacher Education, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, In- donesia 3Mathematics Department, National Central University, Taiwan DOI: 10.23917/ijolae.v3i1.10269 Received: February 15th, 2020. Revised: March 23th, 2020. Accepted: March 25th, 2020 Available Online: April 20th, 2020. Published Regularly: January 1st, 2021 Abstract This study applies the “Make A Match model” to mathematics subjects, in increasing the ability to understand concepts and student learning outcomes in mathematics. This type of research is Classroom Action Research (CAR) and uses a Kemmis and Taggart model design with four stages, namely 1) Planning, 2) Action, 3) Observation, and 4) Reflection with a qualitative approach. This study uses 3 cycles, namely pre-cycle, cycle I and cycle II. Each cycle consists of four stages, namely: planning, action, observation, and reflection. This research was conducted at Yogyakarta PGRI University. The research subjects are second- semester students majoring in Elementary education (Pendidikan Guru Sekolah Dasar, hereafter called “PGSD”). The instrument used was a test that contained questions in the form of essays. Analysis of the data used is qualitative descriptive analysis. The results were obtained based on indicators of concept understanding, namely in the second cycle which increased including 1) students who were able to restate the concept from 62.50% in the pre-cycle to 76.38% in the second cycle, 2) students who were able to give examples 72.76% in the pre-cycle to 76.38% in the second cycle, 3) students who are able to present concepts in various representations from 70.86% in the pre-cycle to 85.34% in the second cycle, and 4) students who are able to associate internal or external Make A Match model from 70.69% pre-cycle to 76.38% in cycle II. It was concluded that the “Make A Match learning model” can improve students' understanding of concepts and learning outcomes in mathematics learning. Keywords: learning results, make a match model, understanding of concepts Corresponding Author: Ana Juliani, Department Of Elementary School Teacher Education, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia E-mail: anajuliani1993@gmail.com 1. Introduction The development of assessment models for students has always been a polemic among academics and practitioners, and further reinforces that assessment in learning is very important. Classification of asses- sment of learning outcomes according to Bloom's Taxonomy consists of cognitive aspects, attitudes and skills. Therefore, the assessment of learning outcomes must be comprehensive based on these three aspects (Anderson, 2011). In general, learning out- comes include several aspects, namely cogni- tive views of the learning process, and affec- tive views of learning outcomes. Hu (2014) says cognitive learning processes are often measured as test scores and assignments, while affective learning outcomes are often measured in terms of attitudes, values, aspi- rations, personalities and self-concepts. Bro- oks (2014) concluded in his research that assessment of learning outcomes is expected Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education http://journals.ums.ac.id/index.php/ijolae Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE)| p-ISSN 2655-920x, e-ISSN 2656-2804 Vol. 3 (1) (2021) 48-56 49 “Make A Match Model” for Improving the Understanding of Concepts and Student Learning Results to change the way students learn. Whereas Keshavarz (2011) argues that learning out- comes focus on the cognitive development, behavior and attitudes of students as seen from the way they interact in learning activi- ties. Locke (Suneetha, Rao & Rao, 2011) re- vealed that mathematics is one way for stu- dents to solve problems using the power of reasoning. In addition to exercising the po- wer of reasoning, he also develops students' mental abilities in logical thinking, obser- ving, remembering, concentrating, and in- creasing student confidence (Suneetha, Rao, and Rao, 2011). There are several important things that need to be considered in learning mathematics, namely: 1) teaching about de- veloping student characteristics, 2) involving students in every learning activity in mathe- matics, 3) changing learning from concrete learning to abstract, and 4) using good communication to encourage student unders- tanding (Reys, 2012). Eurika & Fritz (2018) argue that mathematics learning must com- bine empirical findings with curriculum de- mands. Another opinion was expressed by Tar- gated News Service (2015), that mathematics is a very important science of curriculum in the world, because it must be able to invite students to be able to think critically and solve problems that are classified as complex and can compete in this 21st century. While Zipper et al (2017) argue that mathematical skills are very valuable because they are con- sidered professional ;in everyday life ma- thematics is used to manage finances. Ma- thematical learning will be more meaningful when learning is dominated by active stu- dents while the teacher acts as a facilitator (Smith, 2018). In addition, learning mathe- matics must also be fun, inspiring, innovati- ve and diverse so that students are easier and more effective in capturing learning (Root- zen, 2015). So by learning mathematics so- meone has attitudes and habits of critical, logical, and systematic thinking. Understan- ding concepts is the key to learning. Unders- tanding this concept emphasizes that every material taught to students is not only memo- rized, but also for practice that students will do. If students do not have a good understan- ding of concepts, students lack understan- ding of material concepts in mathematics, so students cannot solve mathematical problems correctly. A teacher's understanding of how a student can learn mathematics is an impor- tant element to start understanding miscon- ceptions in mathematics (Hansen, 2011). Li & Ni (2013) said that understanding the rela- tionship of mathematics with everyday life can be a new challenge for lecturers in lear- ning. Satrio (2016) in his research revealed the low achievement, understanding of concepts and student learning outcomes due to several factors, including the use of mathematical learning models that are considered ineffec- tive for students, the lack of student focus in learning so that when lecturers provide op- portunities to ask questions about material that is not yet understood, no one dared to ask questions because they did not unders- tand what was explained by the lecturer, and gave examples of questions and practice questions to students. The learning model makes students only as static objects that must obey all instructions from the lecturer, thus making students passive in participating in learning. An important role in conceptual unders- tanding of mathematics learning is to balance factual knowledge with procedural abilities, so students can become active and effective learners (Six Principles for School Mathema- tics, 2014). The instruction process for stu- dents both with and without disabilities, lec- turers need a diagnostic process to assess Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE)| p-ISSN 2655-920x, e-ISSN 2656-2804 Vol. 3 (1) (2021) 48-56 50 “Make A Match Model” for Improving the Understanding of Concepts and Student Learning Results students' level of understanding of Make A Match Model (Hunt & Little, 2014). Instruc- tion is a process that can help students to achieve learning targets (Nitko & Brookhart, 2011). In Bloom's Taxonomy, understanding is the ability to absorb the meaning of a sub- ject, where a student will be declared to un- derstand the material if it can construct the meaning of the message received both orally and in writing (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2010). The results of preliminary observations made on PGSD students found that elemen- tary school mathematics learning outcomes are still low. In addition, there were several problems found, including students who we- re busy talking about unrelated learning ma- terials, student activities related to learning were still low because students listened more to the material from lecturers, students were less responsive when lecturers were having difficulties. turn on the LCD to use it to con- vey the material, the learning methods used do not vary, some even sleep when the lectu- rer explains the material. If this is not han- dled immediately, it will greatly affect the student's final grade. Several other problems are identified as factors that cause low student learning out- comes: First is learning that is dominated by lectures or presentations by lecturers and students record what is explained by the lec- turer, then lecturers hold the Mid Semester Exams and Final Semester Exams. With such learning students are not given the opportu- nity to hone their abilities or knowledge. So learning motivation is reduced and interest in learning basic mathematics decreases. Second, the lecturer does not arrange the environment and learning atmosphere. The learning environment and atmosphere still looks conventional and monotonous. The learning table arrangement still uses the old pattern, where the learning table is arranged in one line so students sit sideways and ex- tend backwards. By setting this learning en- vironment and atmosphere, it causes absor- ption and understanding of students' concepts to differ between those who sit in the front and those who sit in the back. Third, lectu- rers pay less attention to the different charac- teristics of each student. For this reason, it is important to make improvements in the lear- ning process through the application of crea- tive and innovative cooperative learning mo- dels. Thus, students become interested in learning basic mathematics. According to Arends & Kilcher (2010) cooperative learning is a learning strategy carried out in groups to maximize active stu- dents in learning, active in interacting and active in working together. This is confirmed by Pederson & Digby (2013) which states that cooperative learning can be used at the educational level in each subject. This opini- on is commensurate with the research results of Thruston, Karagiannidou, Tolmie, Chris- tie, Murray, Topping (2010) who said that cooperative learning can be applied at all levels of education and can improve student learning outcomes. One model of cooperative learning that can be applied in mathematics learning is A Match learning model. Rusman (2012) ex- plains that the Match Model is a model that can be used for all subjects and for all age levels of students, and in this method stu- dents look for pairs of cards while learning about concepts or topics in a pleasant atmos- phere. Agus Suprijono (2012) suggests that the things that need to be prepared if learning is applied with the Match model are cards. Cards consist of cards that contain questions and other cards that contain answers to these questions. So, according to researchers through the application of the Match type of cooperative learning model, it will be more helpful for students to understand mathema- Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE)| p-ISSN 2655-920x, e-ISSN 2656-2804 Vol. 3 (1) (2021) 48-56 51 “Make A Match Model” for Improving the Understanding of Concepts and Student Learning Results tical concepts and can also improve learning outcomes. Based on the description above, the pur- pose of this study is to apply the Match le- arning model, to improve understanding of concepts and student learning outcomes in mathematics. This study also aims to deter- mine the contribution of the Match learning model to the understanding of concepts and student learning outcomes. 2. Method This research was conducted at Yogyakarta PGRI University. This type of research is Classroom Action Research. Suharsimi Arikunto (2010) said briefly that Classroom Action Research is a learning activity that consists of actions that are raised and carried out simultaneously in the classroom. The research subjects were 29 students in class A7, with the composition of 18 female students and 11 male students.. The data analysis technique used in this study uses quantitative analysis and uses descriptive statistics. In this study, data collection techniques used for research are through tests that contain a series of questions.The test given is adjusted to the specific learning objectives to be achieved, then adjusted to the mathematics material of A7 grade students of Yogyakarta PGRI University and by using the Make A Match learning model given by the lecturer. The ability to understand concepts and student mathematics learning outcomes through the application of Make A Match learning models can be said to be complete if they meet the completeness criteria. To calculate the percentage of students' understanding of concept achievement, a formula is used: K = Information: K : percentage of achievement indicator of understanding concepts and learning outcomes. : the number of scores achieved on the indicator of understanding con- cepts and learning outcomes : the total score of the indicator mul- tiplied by the number of students This Classroom Action Research is divided into 2 cycles and each cycle consists of 2 meetings. The steps of conducting this research through four stages, namely: planning, action, observation, and reflection (Arikunto, 2010: 137). The flowchart used in this research can be described: Figure 1. Class Action Research Model according to Kemmis & M. Taggart (Arikunto, 2008:16) Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE)| p-ISSN 2655-920x, e-ISSN 2656-2804 Vol. 3 (1) (2021) 48-56 52 “Make A Match Model” for Improving the Understanding of Concepts and Student Learning Results 3. Result and Discussion Learning that has been done thoroughly in the action cycle I and cycle II through the application of the Making A Match learning model, shows an increase in understanding of concepts and learning outcomes in ma- thematics in accordance with the indicators that have been used by researchers. Cycle I was conducted in 1 meeting, namely on March 28, 2018, with an allocation of mee- ting time 2 x 50 minutes at 12:30 - 14.50. In this first cycle, the material taught is about multiplication and division numbers. Cycle 1 consisted of 4 stages, namely the planning stage, the action stage, the observation stage, and the reflection stage. In the first stage, namely the planning stage, the researcher designed the learning tools and instruments and discussed these tools and instruments with the elementary mathematics lecturer in the Elementary education (PGSD) study pro- gram Yogyakarta PGRI. The next stage is the action stage using the Making a Match model. From the results obtained during the study, the learning process provided by the lecturer was in accordance with the planning of the learning tools that had been prepared together with the researcher. The learning steps that have been plan- ned in the study use the “Make A Match le- arning model”, in which the lecturer opens the lesson and absences the student, makes an agreement with the student about the lear- ning model that will be used later- the “Make A Match model”, arranges the classroom layout into the letter U to make it easier for students do a game with the model of Ma- king a Match, then the lecturer gives apper- ception and learning objectives to students while showing 2 types of cards namely ques- tion cards and answer cards. After the lectu- rer gives the apperception and learning ob- jectives the lecturer explains the material about Multiplication number and Distributi- on number for 30 minutes. When explaining the material, there were still some students who did not focus on learning, such as cool chatting alone, and sleeping in the classro- om. Then the lecturer gives the opportunity for students to ask questions related to the material that has been delivered that they do not understand. After explaining the materi- al, the lecturer held a demonstration by as- king all students to make two large groups, the group formed in a long line in the middle of the room and facing each other between group A and group B. Then the lecturer took the question card and answer card and ex- plained it to students about how to play. Af- ter the lecturer explains the rules of the ga- me, the lecturer distributes question card to group A and answer card to group B, and invites students to immediately look for the pair of cards held without giving students the opportunity to think which pair of cards they have. After students get the pair of cards, students immediately report to the lecturer and immediately sit in pairs. From this game, the lecturer noted that only 15 pairs of stu- dents managed to find their partners and 14 students who did not find their partners. For students who have succeeded in collecting points, the lecturer gives an award, as well as motivation for students who have not yet managed to find a card partner and who do not get points. This demonstration is carried out for 20 minutes. Then the lecturer closes the lesson by praying and saying hello. Student learning outcomes in basic ma- thematics subjects is the level of understan- ding of student concepts that can be mastered by students on the material that has been delivered by the lecturer, namely cognitive abilities, affective abilities, and psychomotor abilities. The learning outcomes and unders- tanding of this concept can be shown as fol- lows: Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE)| p-ISSN 2655-920x, e-ISSN 2656-2804 Vol. 3 (1) (2021) 48-56 53 “Make A Match Model” for Improving the Understanding of Concepts and Student Learning Results Table 1. Data about increasing the understanding of concepts and mathematics learning outcomes of UPY PGSD students Table 1 shows the comparison of student learning outcomes before conducting rese- arch and after conducting research. The re- sults obtained are not too high but have in- creased in each cycle. The following data improve the understanding of concepts and student learning outcomes before and after research in graphical form: Figure 2. Pre cycle understanding results the concepts and learning outcomes of UPY PGSD students Figure 3. The results of the first cycle of understanding the concepts and learning outcomes of UPY PGSD students 67.50% 74.14% 75.17% 74.66% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% Re sta te… Gi ve … Pr es en … Co nn e… CYCLE I CYCLE I No Aspect Before Research After research Cycle I Cycle II 1 Restate the concept and learning outcomes 62.5% 67.5% 76.03% 2 Give an example 72.76% 74.14% 76.38% 3 Presenting the concept of 70.86% 75.17% 85.34% 4 Connecting concepts with everyday life 70.69% 74.66% 76.38% Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE)| p-ISSN 2655-920x, e-ISSN 2656-2804 Vol. 3 (1) (2021) 48-56 54 “Make A Match Model” for Improving the Understanding of Concepts and Student Learning Results Figure 4. The results of the second cycle of understanding the concepts and learning outcomes of UPY PGSD students Research conducted by researchers on understanding concepts and student learning outcomes in mathematics has increased from before the implementation of the action to the first cycle and the second cycle of action by applying the “Make A Match learning model”. This can be shown from the indica- tors, namely 1) students who are able to res- tate the concept from 62.50% to 76.38%, 2) students who are able to give examples from 72.76% to 76.38%, 3) students are able to present concepts in various representations from 70.86% to 85.34%, and 4) students who are able to connect mathematical concepts internally or externally from 70.69% to 76.38%. Overall the model of “Make A Match learning” can improve the understanding of concepts and student learning outcomes in mathematics from cycle I to cycle II. In- creased understanding of students' mathema- tical concepts can clearly be seen in cycle II. The learning process in the second cycle shows students' attitudes that can be con- trolled through learning activities provided by the lecturer. This condition has an impact on increasing understanding of mathematical concepts in restating concepts, giving exam- ples, presenting concepts, and linking ma- thematical concepts internally or externally. Based on the results of discussions between lecturers and researchers, the use of “Make A Match Model” can be used as an alternative in improving the understanding of concepts and mathematics learning outcomes of PGSD students. This research was condu- cted by applying two learning cycles with the same learning model as that Make A Match. The results of the study through the test, pre-cycle activities 29 students on the first indicator can be seen that students' unders- tanding of Make A Match model is still very low with an average of 62.5% or equivalent to 11 students who completed 29 students, then in the first cycle increased to 67.5% but in this cycle 1 the number of students who finished was still the same as the pre-cycle which was 11 students who completed from 29 students because in the first cycle there was no increase, so research in cycle II, in this cycle student’s understanding of Make A Match model had increased to 76.03%, with 24 students completed from 29 students. So the increase in understanding of concepts and learning outcomes of UPY PGSD students between cycle I to cycle II was 8.53%. Then the results of research through tests on concept of understanding and learning outcomes, in pre-cycle activities of 29 stu- dents on the second indicator can be seen that the understanding of concepts and stu- dent learning outcomes in mathematics is quite good with an average of 72.76% or equivalent to 22 students who have comple- Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE)| p-ISSN 2655-920x, e-ISSN 2656-2804 Vol. 3 (1) (2021) 48-56 55 “Make A Match Model” for Improving the Understanding of Concepts and Student Learning Results ted from 29 students, then in the first cycle increased to 74.14% ie as many as 25 stu- dents who completed from 29 students, then in the second cycle the understanding of concepts and learning outcomes of students increased to 85.34% ie as many as 27 stu- dents who completed from 29 students. So the increase in understanding of concepts and learning outcomes of UPY PGSD students between cycle I to cycle II was 11.2%. Then in the third indicator in the pre- cycle activities, it is known that the average understanding of Make A Match model of students is 70.86% or as many as 13 students who finished out of 29 students because in the pre-cycle activities the number of stu- dents completing is still small; the resear- chers take action by applying cycle I. In the first cycle the results obtained an average understanding of concepts and learning out- comes of 75.17% or as many as 22 students who completed. It can be seen from the pre- cycle activities to cycle I experienced a sig- nificant increase, but researchers are still trying to continue the cycle to cycle II. After the second cycle is applied, the average re- sults of understanding concepts and mathe- matics learning outcomes of students are obtained by 85.34% or as many as 26 stu- dents who complete. So it can be concluded on this third indicator that students have be- gun to understand mathematical concepts given by the lecturer. So the increase in un- derstanding of concepts and learning outco- mes of UPY PGSD students between cycle I to cycle II on this third indicator is 10.17%. Finally, in the indicator four, the pre- cycle results obtained the average understan- ding of Make A Match model is 70.69% or 17 students who completed from 29 students. Because in the pre-cycle activities the num- ber of students who completed was still rela- tively small, the researchers took action by applying the first cycle. In the first cycle, the average understanding of the concept was 74.66% or 23 students who completed it. From pre-cycle activities to cycle I can be seen that the average understanding of the concept of students has increased significan- tly, but researchers are still trying to continue the cycle to cycle II. After the second cycle is applied, the average result of understan- ding Make A Match model is obtained by 76.38% or as many as 24 students who com- plete it. Then it can be concluded on this fourth indicator, students have begun to un- derstand Make A Match model given by the lecturer. So the increase in understanding of the concept of UPY PGSD students between cycle I to cycle II on this fourth indicator is 1.72%. From the results of the tests carried out from cycle I to cycle II, the researcher can conclude that the application of the “Make a match learning model” has been proven to be able to improve the understanding of con- cepts and learning outcomes of UPY PGSD students. These results can be proven by the average and the number of students who complete each cycle on each indicator. 4. Conclusion Based on the results of the above rese- arch conducted on A7 grade PGSD students it can be concluded that 1) “Make a Match” is a learning model designed to help students learn and understand the material, and help improve student learning outcomes, 2) the “Make a Match model” can be used in ma- thematics learning and greatly helps improve student learning outcomes, and 3) based on the test instrument used there is an increase in understanding of concepts and student learning outcomes. Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE)| p-ISSN 2655-920x, e-ISSN 2656-2804 Vol. 3 (1) (2021) 48-56 56 “Make A Match Model” for Improving the Understanding of Concepts and Student Learning Results 5. References Agus, Suprijono. 2012. Cooperative Lear- ning: Teori dan Aplikasi Paikem. Yogyakrta: Pustaka Pelajar. Anderson, Lorin W. & David Krathwohl. (2010). Kerangka landasan untuk pem- belajaran pengajaran dan asessmen. (Terjemahan Agung Prihantoro). New York: Company, Inc. (Buku asli diterbi- tkan tahun 1956). Anderson, L. W. & Krathwohl, D. R. (2011). Taxonomy learning, teaching, and as- sessing. New York: Longman. Arends, R. I., & Kilcher, A. (2010). Tea- ching for student learning: becoming an accomplished teacher. New York: Routledge. Brooks, Sara. Et al. (2014). Learning about learning outcomes: the student perspec- tive. Routladge, Taylor & Francis Group. Vol. 19, No. 6, Hal. 721-733. Eurika Jansen, V. V., Herzog, M., & Fritz, A. (2018). Meerkat maths – a com- prehensive maths learning programme for grade-R. South african journal of childhood education (SAJCE), 8(2). Hansen, A. (2011), Childrens errors in ma- thematics. Exeter, California: SAGE Pu- blication Inc. Hunt, J. H., & Little, M. E. (2014). Intensi- fying interventions for students by iden- tifying and remediating conceptual un- derstandings in mathematics. Council for Exceptional Children. Hu, Z. (2014). Students’ experience and per- ceived learning outcomes in internatio- nal collaborative programs in shanghai, china (Disertasi doctor, University of the pacific stockton, 2014). UMI Disserta- tion Publishing. Keshavarz, M. (2011). Measuring course learning outcomes. Journal of learning design, 4, 1-9. Li, Qi., & Ni, Y. (2013). Debates in the basic education curriculum reform and tea- chers’ challenges in china. Chinese edu- cation & society, 45(4), 9-21. Nitko, A. J., & Brookhart, S. M. (2011). Educational assessment of student. Bos- ton. Pearson/ Allyn & Bacon. Pederson, J. E. & Digby, A. (2013). Secon- dary school and cooperative learning: theory, models, and strategies. New York: Routledge. Reys, R., et al. (2012). Helping Children Learn Mathematics. Hoboken: John Willey & Son, Inc. Rootzen, H. (2015). Individualized learning through non-linear use of learning ob- jects: with examples from math and stat. Kidmore End: Academic Conferences International Limited. Rusman, 2012. Model-model Pembelajaran: Mengembangkan Profesionalisme Guru, RajaGrafindo Persada, Jakarta. Satrio, S. W., & Vahlia, I. (2016). Efektifi- tas penggunaan metode pembelajaran quantum learning terhadap kemampuan pemahaman konsep matematis maha- siswa. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 7(2), 275-276. Six Principles for School Mathematics. (2014). National council of teachers of mathematics, 1-6. Smith, T. (2018). Active learning in the math classroom. Teach & learning, 38(7), 26- 28 Suharsimi, Arikunto. (2010). Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara. Suneetha, E., Rao, R. S., & Rao, D. B. (2011). Methods of teaching mathema- tics. New Delhi: Discovery Publishing House. Targated News Service (2015). Allabama teacher recognized for enhancing stu- dent learning in math and science. Wa- shington, D.C. Thruston, A., Karagiannidou, E., Tolmie, A., Christie, D., Murray, P., Topping, K. (2010). Enhancing outcomes in school science for pupils during transition from elementary school using cooperative le- arning. Middle grades research journal, 5, 19-32. Zipper, E. L., Diamant-Cohen, B., & Gol- dsmith, A. Y. (2017). Math counts too!: promoting family engagement in math activities at home. Children & libraries, 15(2), 38-40.