Creative Education 2013. Vol.4, No.2, 98-100 Published nline !ebruar" 2013 in #ci$es %htt&'(())).scir&.or*(+ournal(ce +t/ #cientiic $esearch htt&'((d.doi.or*(10.423(ce.2013.42014 Eect oCoo&erative earnin* on #econda r" #chool #tudents5 6athe7atics chieve7ent Eandi a:aria 1 , ;iti #olitri 2 , <uso=aud 1 , ul:arnain ainal bidin 2 1 !acult" oEducation, >niversiti ?eban*saan 6ala"sia, @an*i, 6ala"sia 2 !acult" o;eacher ;rainin* and Education, >niversiti $iau, Pe:anbaru, Andonesia E7ail'eandiBu:7.7" $eceived Nove7ber 22 nd , 2012revised =ece7ber 2D th , 2012acce&ted anuar" th , 2013 ;he &ur&ose othis stud" )as to deter7ine the eect s ocoo&erat ive learnin * on stud ents 5 7ath e7at ics achieve7ent in secondar" school students in Pe:anbaru, Andonesia. An addition, this stud" also deter7ined students5 &erce&tion concernin* coo&erative learnin*. ;he sa7&les othis stud" consisted o1 !or7 ;hree students. An order to control the dierences ode&endent variables, a &re-test )as *iven beore treat7ent. ter treat7ent, a &ost-test )as ad7inistered to both *rou&s. ;)o t"&es oinstru7ents )ere used to collect the data' the 7athe7atics achieve7ent test and o&en-ended Fuestions on coo&erative learnin*. ;he &re-test and the &ost-test data )ere anal"Ged usin* t-test. Content anal"sis )as used or the o&en-ended Fuesti ons on coo& erat ive lear nin* . ;he results sho)ed that ther e )as a si*n iic ant dieren ce o7ean in stud ents 5 7ath e7at ics achi eve7ent bet)een the coo& erat ive *rou & and the trad itio nal *rou &. Cont ent anal "sis data reve aled that stud ents in the coo&erative *rou& )ere able to increase their understandin * and to develo& their sel-conidence. Keywords' 6athe7atics chieve7enti*sa) Coo&erative earnin*>nderstandin*#el-Conidenc e Introduction 6athe 7atic s is still a sub+ec t that is consider ed diicult and borin* to 7an" students. ccordin* to Hoodard %2004, )ea:er studen ts eel aniet" to)ard 7athe7at ics, and this aniet" aects their &eror7ance in 7athe7atics. #tudents )ho lac: 7aster" in 7athe7atics are less successul, des&ite bein* in secondar" schools or a lon* &eriod oti7e. !urther7ore, lo) &roicienc" students in 7at he7a tic s &er or 7ed bel o) ave ra *e on the nat ional tes ts in Andone sia . @ased on obs ervati ons ohi*h sch ool 7at he7ati cs students, the inor7ati on sho)s that students are not ac tive l" invo lve d in develo &in* :no)led *ethe " re cei ve inor7ati on &assivel" and are less 7otivated. ;his &assivit" has caused 7uch concern a7on* educators because :no)led*e o7athe7atics &la"s a si*niica nt role in enhanc in* the cou ntr "5s soc ial eco no7ic devel o&7ent. ;he Fualit" oeduca tion that teac hers &rovide to studen ts is de&end ent u&on )hat teache rs do in their class roo7 %a:aria I A:san, 200D. ;he teachin* 7ethod used in the class is one othe actors that 7a:e students beco7e &assive and have less int era cti on )it h eac h other in doin * tas :s. aG aro )it G, Jer tG- aGaro)itG, and @aird %1994have criticiGed the lecture 7ethod use b" teachers because onl" hard)or:in* students can beneit ro7 it. ;her eore, to enhan ce the unders tandi n* o7athe7atics , studen ts 7ust be 7ore active in the classroo7 and 7ust creativel" acFuire :no)le d*e, es&ec iall" in unders tandin * and solvin * 7athe 7atic al &roble7s. #tudents should be *iven the o&&o rtunities to develo&, to inter act, and to share )ith riends throu*h coo&era tive learnin* activit". ;hus, the co*nitive and aective develo&7ent ostudents in 7athe7atics can be i7&roved. n alternative 7ethod or the delive r" o7aterial is coo&er ative learni n*. a:a ria and A:san %200Da*ree that in coo&erative learnin* students )or: ace to ace to co7&le te a *ive n tas : col lec tivel" . Coo&er ati ve lea rni n* encoura*es students to be active &artici&ants in the construction otheir o)n :no)led*e %Hebb, ;ro&er, I !all, 199K. Coo&erative learnin* also encoura*es students to interact and to co77unicate )ith &eers in har7on". An this )a", coo&erative learnin* &ro7otes values such as honest", coo&eration, 7utual res&ect, res&onsibilit", tolerance, and )illin* to sacriice a consensus. Eecution oduties in coo&erative learnin* can develo& sel-conidence in &u&ils. stud" b" a:aria, Chin, and =aud %2010ound that coo&erative learnin* i7&rov es studen ts5 achi eve7e nt in 7athe7a tics. !urther, coo&er ative learnin* is an ee ctive a&&roac h that 7athe7ati cs tea che rs nee d to inc or& ora te int o the ir tea chin*. Coo&er ati ve learnin* &ro7otes dee& learnin* o7aterials and hel&s students to achieve better *rades %#hi7aGoe I l- drich, 2010. ccordin* to ohnson and ohnson %1989, in coo&erative learnin*, students tend to en+o" 7athe7atics, and this en+o"7ent 7otivates the7 to learn. 6elihan and #irri %2011concluded that the coo&erative learnin* 7ethod is 7ore eective than the traditional teachin* 7ethod in the acade7ic success ostudents. Purpose and Objectives of the Study ;he &ur&ose othis stud" is to deter7ine the eects o+i*sa) coo&erative learnin* on achieve7ent in 7athe7atics. An addition, this stud" also loo:s at students5 &erce&tions o+i*sa) coo&erative learnin*. ;he s&eciic ob+ectives othis stud" are as ollo)s' 1to deter7ine )hether there is a statisticall" si*niicant dierence in 7athe7atics achieve7ent bet)e en studen ts tau*ht usin* +i*sa) coo&erative 7ethods and students tau*ht usin* traditional 7ethods and 2to det er7ine the &er ce& tions ostu dents )he n the " are e&osed to +i*sa) coo&erative learnin*. Hypothesis of the Study ;he ollo)in* null h"&othesis )as tested. J01 L;here is no si*niicant dierence in 7athe7atics ach ieve7e nt bet )een stu dents )ho are e&ose d to +i*sa) co- o&e rat ive lea rni n* and thos e )ho are e&ose d to tra dit iona l 7ethods. 98 Co&"ri*ht M 2013 #ci$es.
