Barred Pipe Modification

Does It Affect the Learning Results?

Boby Agustan

1,2

, Nurlan Kusmaedi

and Adang Suherman

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Jl. Dr. Setiabudhi No. 229, Bandung, Indonesia

Sekolah Tinggi Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan Muhammadiyah Kuningan,

Jl. Murtasiah Supomo No. 28B, Kuningan, Jawa Barat, Indonesia

bobyagustan@gmail.com

Keywords: Modification, Barred Pipe, Learning Outcome.

Abstract: This research aims to find out about the effect of basketball learning modification on ‘layup shot’ learning

result. The method used in this research is the experimental method, with the research design of ‘Randomize

Pre-test – Post-test Control Group Design’. The population in this research consists of 11th graders from

SMAN 1 Sindangwangi, consisting of 103 students from four different classes. The sample in this research

was acquired using ‘cluster random sampling’ method. The sample acquired consisted of 50 students from

two different classes, each class consisted of 25 students. One class becomes an experimental group, and the

other one becomes the control group. The instrument in this research is ‘layup shot’ test. This research was

conducted for four weeks; three meetings were done each every week. The data analysis technique is SPSS

18 through ‘Paired Samples t-Test’ and ‘Independent t-Test’. The outputs from this research are: 1) There’s

a significant increase of score between the pre-test and post-test score on the students’ layup shot learning

result that used the barred pipe modification learning; 2) There was no significant increase in score between

the pre-test score and post-test score on the layup shot learning result of the students that used the

conventional learning.

1 INTRODUCTION

Physical education is a part of the education programs

which offer contribution through experiences from

the movement towards the students’ holistic

development and growth. The complex learning

experience about the students’ motoric capabilities

(Arianto, 2013). The objective of physical education

learning formulated by the teachers in the process of

teaching and learning should refer to the curriculum

and physical education becomes really important and

useful. (Kurkova, Scheetz and Stelzer, 2010).

Everytime they teach, teachers are expected to be able

to formulate the objective of the learning activity,

specifically in the form of physical activity which can

be observed; to describe the assigned job clearly, in

which the level of success can be measured and

evaluated as well.

The physical activity of the students must be

supported by the factors in accordance with their

development. For instance, the physical activity is

centered on the factors of pleasure, accomplishment,

and the ability to move (Hohepa, Schofield and Kolt,

2006). Moreover, this physical education should not

make the students have too much trouble in which can

cause them to be stressed out (Blankenship, 2007).

On the characteristics and the meaning of physical

education, physical education should be able to make

the students feel comfortable and confident to

participate in the learning process (Reeves and Stein,

1999). The participation can be exercised if the

physical education equipment should be met. The

participation in this activity has to have contents,

especially in physical education (Isabel Piñar et al.,

2009).

One way for the teaching process with the

students’ participation can be done, but the equipment

does not support the process itself, is to create a

modification to cover the deficiencies in terms of

facilities and infrastructure. With the lack of

supportive of facilities and infrastructure, for the

basketball learning process can be done, the teachers

have very active roles in the learning process in

accordance with the curriculum that has been made.

Agustan, B., Kusmaedi, N. and Suherman, A.

Barred Pipe Modiﬁcation - Does It Affect the Learning Results?.

In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education (ICSSHPE 2017) - Volume 2, pages 133-135

ISBN: 978-989-758-317-9

133

Moreover, as the students are heterogeneous, the

modification should be in accordance with the

students’ level of capabilities. What’s important in

this modification is that for the essence to maintain,

because the essence of this modification is to analyze

and develop the teaching materials by designing the

potential learning activities, so that this can help the

students to learn. It is meant to lead, direct, and get

students to learn. Therefore, students can work on

their scientific abilities and skills (Arianto, 2013).

The abilities of the students will be formed if they

exercise the move often through the experience

assigned by the teachers. This is as stated on the

meaning of the physical education itself, which is a

part of the educational program which offers

contribution through the experience of movement

towards the holistic development and the students’

growth. A complex learning experience about the

students’ motor. (Arianto, 2013).

The modification has a basic purpose, to simplify

some games assigned without losing the existing

fundamental concept (Arias, Argudo and Alonso,

2011). This purpose is related to the result that is

expected in lay up shot. After the modification is

considered to be needed, it has to be analyzed, like

what and how to make that modification to fit the

concept of physical education learning and it has to

be analyzed first (Arias, Argudo and Alonso, 2011).

Moreover, the key of modification involves a process

to find out about the change in the games, without

leaving out the characteristics of the games (Arianto,

2013).

The modification of the equipment is also

important for the students (Chase et al., 1994). This

can usually affect the interest and motivations of the

students in following all the teaching materials

without any obstacles related to learning equipment.

The modification also refers to the process of

presenting the better things than the original forms.

The modification is one of the means to be done by

the teachers so that the learning process can reflect

the quality of the process itself. (Arianto, 2013).

Related to the learning result, we chose the

psychomotor learning result type: the shooting result.

The shooting method chosen is the layup shot,

because lay up shot can have more influence than any

other type of shots. (Arias, 2012).

2 METHOD

2.1 Participant

We used the cluster random sampling technique, and

we got samples from the class of XI IPS 1 and XI IPS

2, XI IPS 2 as the experimental group and XI IPS 1 as

the control group. The samples chosen from the

experimental group will be the representative of the

eleventh-grade students in SMAN 1 Sindangwangi.

2.2 Procedure

By using the Randomize Pre-test – Post-test Control

Group experimental method, we wanted to see how

far the treatment from two types of treatment, the

modified basketball games learning, in this case, the

layup shot learning, on the experimental group to the

layup shot learning result on the eleventh graders.

2.3 Instruments

Layup shot test (Rismayadi, 2001, pg. 53) stated that

the measuring instrument for the layup shot test with

layup shot test that has the validity level of 0.79 and

reliability 0.90 as the test instruments.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

These are the description of the data coming out as

the result of the layup shot learning, as shown in

Table 1.

Table 1: Description of the lay up shot result data.

Groups Test Treatment N Average

Average

Gains

Standard

deviation

Experiment

Pre-tes

Barred Pipe

Modification

25 1.64

1.32

1.08

Pos

-tes

25 2.96 1.09

Control

Pre-tes

Conventional

Learning

25 1.68

0.08

1.11

Pos

-tes

25 1.76 1.17

According to the Table, the score of the layup shot

learning result on the barred pipe modification pre-

test group has the average of 1.64, whereas the post-

test has the average of 2.96. The conventional

learning group shows the score of 1.68 for the pre-test

and 1.76 for the post-test. It means that, according to

ICSSHPE 2017 - 2nd International Conference on Sports Science, Health and Physical Education

134

the average score comparison between the pre-test

and post-test scores on the two treatments, there is an

increase of score on the barred pipe modification

group, whereas, on the conventional learning group,

the score increases, but not significantly. It is obvious

that on the barred pipe modification, the score

increases more, compared to the conventional

learning.

The barred pipe modification has been proven to

be able to give such good influence on the result of

the layup shot learning in the basketball games

learning in SMAN 1 Sindangwangi, stated that there

is a significant increase of the score between the pre-

test and post-test scores.

The modification here refers to a creation,

adjustment, and shows some new, unique and

interesting equipment/infrastructures on the physical

education teaching and learning process (Arias,

Argudo and Alonso, 2011). The implementation of

this modification is really needed by every physical

education teacher as one of the alternatives or

solutions in overcoming the problems that happen in

the physical education teaching and learning process,

especially on the sports games, the modification is a

neat, focused, and integrated to the other educational

aspects.

The barred pipe modification makes it easy for the

students to learn the layup shot. This is in accordance

with the meaning of the modification, that it should

be able to make the students feel comfortable and

confident in participating in the learning process

(Reeves and Stein, 1999). It has to be remembered

that physical education should attract the students to

learn and make them more creative so that they can

discover new things so that if there is no qualified

equipment, the teachers should do something that can

encourage the students to learn with the modification

method.

Participation can also be achieved by

modification (Eime et al., 2015). The limits on the

learning facilities can inhibit the students’ physical

activities. This is not in accordance with the meaning

of the physical education learning. Participation can

also be helpful for the students in socializing with

their friends, as the movement assigned usually has to

be done together (Isabel Piñar et al., 2009).

4 CONCLUSIONS

There are two conclusions: 1) There is a significant

increase in the score between the pre-test and post-

test scores on the layup shot learning result of the

eleventh-grade students, using the barred pipe

modification method; 2) There is no significant

increase between the pre-test and post-test scores on

the layup shot result of the eleventh-grade students

that used the conventional learning method.

REFERENCES

Arianto. 2013. ‘The Effect of Learning Model, Learning

Media and School’, The Journal of Educational

Development 1(2), pp. 65–70.s

Arias, J. 2012. ‘Does the Modification of Ball Mass

Influence the Types of Attempted and Successful Shots

in Youth Basketball?’, Human Movement, 13(2).

Arias, J. L., Argudo, F. M., Alonso, J. I. 2011. ‘Review of

rule modification in sport’, Journal of Sports Science

and Medicine, 10(1), pp. 1–8.

Blankenship, B. T. 2007. ‘The Stress Process in Physical

Education’, Journal of Physical Education, Recreation

and Dance (JOPERD), 78(6), pp. 39–44.

Chase, M. A. et al. 1994. ‘The effects of equipment

modification on children’s self-efficacy and basketball

shooting performance’, Research Quarterly for

Exercise and Sport, 65(2), pp. 159–168.

Eime, R. M. et al. 2015. ‘Participation in modified sports

programs: a longitudinal study of children’s transition to

club sport competition’, BMC Public Health, 15(1), p.

649.

Hohepa, M., Schofield, G., Kolt, G. S. 2006. ‘Physical

Activity: What Do High School Students Think?’,

Journal of Adolescent Health, 39(3), pp. 328–336.

Isabel Piñar, M. et al. 2009. ‘Participation of minibasketball

players during small-sided competitions’, Revista de

Psicologia del Deporte, 18(SUPPL.), pp. 445–449.

Kurkova, P., Scheetz, N., Stelzer, J. 2010. ‘Health and

physical education as an important part of school

curricula: a comparison of schools for the deaf in the

Czech Republic and the United States.’, American

annals of the deaf, 155(1), pp. 78–95.

Reeves, L., Stein, J. 1999. ‘Developmentally Appropriate

Pedagogy and Inclusion: `Don’t Put the Cart before the

Horse!’.’, Physical Educator, 56(1), p. 2.

Barred Pipe Modiﬁcation - Does It Affect the Learning Results?

135