Student Teams-Achievement Divisions: A Cooperative Learning

Method that Nourishes the Spirit of English Department Students of

Andalas University

Ferdinal and Edria Sandika

English Department Universitas Andalas Padang, Indonesia

Keywords: Student Teams-Achievement Divisions, Cooperative Learning, Motivation, Unand’s English Department

Students.

Abstract: What university students from different cultures and origins achieved through cooperative learning was

subjected to a class-room inquiry. The inquiry centralised on student’s achieve-ment about language skills

through Student Teams-Achievement Divisions (STAD) learning method. This study aimed at identifying the

effect of implementation of STAD on university students’ learning spirit and their fictional analysis

competence. The data were collected through tests and ques-tionnaire. The population was 3 classes (about

90 students) of year one at English Department, Faculty of Humanities, Anda-las University (Unand) in the

even semester 2017/2018. One class was chosen as the sample of the study. The implementa-tion of STAD

indicates that the method was influential to im-prove the learning spirit of the students, including their disci-

pline, interest, cooperativeness, and seriousness. It was also able to upgrade their fictional analysis both in

written test and oral presentation. Furthermore, there was an effect of learning motivation towards student

analysis of fiction. The lecturers and the students committed to learning can continue to enjoy the outcomes

while focusing on cooperative process. It is the process that is capable for unleashing the energies of most

stakeholders in education: teachers, students and officials. If the process is conducted in a well-planned and

careful way will result in the establishment of a generation that endures in a renewable way at all levels:

knowledge, skills and attitude..

1 INTRODUCTION

Class action research has attracted the attention of

many scholars both internationally and domestically

(Slavin, 1980; Arikunto, 2007; Isjoni, 2008; Lie,

2008; Rofiq, 2010; Purnama, 2013). It has triggered

scholars to look at its effects on students in different

parts of the world.

Research on evaluation process of learning has

also been the attention of some Indonesian scholars

(Sudjana, 2009; Sukardi, 2008; Suyono, 2012).

Looking at the issue of action research and its effect

on learning has been an interesting issue to be

investigated among students of Unand. From the

observations in the Department of English Literature

Unand taking Introduction to Literary Studies (ILS),

the learning process was still dominated by activities

such as note-taking, listening, lecturing, and

provision of tasks that proved less able to make them

active in achieving learning objectives. This led to

low student participation in learning activities. In

another words, the students became passive and less

creative. The low quality of learning had an impact

on their learning achievement. Therefore, there must

be an improvement for lecturers in choosing the

learning method. The chosen learning method should

give students the opportunity to learn actively such as

asking, cooperating among students, establishing

positive relationships, developing self-esteem and

increasing group academic ability.

Based on the description above, several problems

can be identified such as 1) the low achievement of

students of ILS in the Department of English

Literature Faculty of Humanities, Unand academic

year 2016/2017. The data obtained during the

observation shows that the average value of the

semester of each class has not reached the passing

score that has been set by the university that is 75. The

low achievement of the students occurred because

they did not master the materials given by the

lecturer. The application of student-centered learning

Ferdinal, . and Sandika, E.

Student Teams-Achievement Divisions.

DOI: 10.5220/0008681501330138

In Improving Educational Quality Toward International Standard (ICED-QA 2018), pages 133-138

ISBN: 978-989-758-392-6

133

method has not run well, causing the low quality of

learning because the learning tends to be monotonous

so that the students' attitude in learning becomes

passive. To improve the quality standard of learning

through the lowest value targeted by Unand (75) for

improving the quality of learning should also be

improved. In this research, the problem to be studied

is limited to the problem of applying the learning

method in improving the activity and achievement in

the course of ILS. This research has used the

cooperative learning method with Student Teams-

Achievement Divisions (STAD) model.

The formulation of the problem in this research is

as follows: 1) Will the application of collaborative

learning method of STAD model can improve the

students' learning activity in ILS course in English

Department Unand? Moreover, 2) Will the

application of the STAD model of collaborative

learning methods improve the fictional ability of ILS

students in the Department of English Literature

Unand in ILS courses?

2 METHODS

This qualitative research up-produced data in writing

and oral form from the activity or behavior of the

subject observed during the learning process. This

action class research was conducted in two cycles,

each with the same procedure. Researchers directly

got involved in the research process from the

beginning to the end of the research both as teacher-

observer and researcher. The research design

followed what Kemmis and McTaggart (1988)

proposed in which each cycle consists of several

stages of action planning, action implementation,

observation, and reflection. This research was

conducted in Introduction to Literary Studies class,

English Department, Faculty of Humanities, Andalas

University. There were 35 registering students and 25

fully participating students, 23 Female and two male

students.

Every cycle includes: 1) Pre-action stage, 2)

Implementation phase of action, 3) Planning, 4)

Implementation of action, 5) Observation and 6)

Reflection. There were two types of data: quantitative

data and qualitative data. Quantitative data derives

from the student ability to complete about the test of

each end of the action, and qualitative data consist of

lecturer and student activity on learning the subject.

In this study, data were collected through: 1)

Provision of tests at the end of each action, 2)

Observation and 3) Field notes. This note is more

general which concerns the place of research, whether

the number of students, lecturers, facilities and

infrastructure. The data collected are then processed

from all available data. With the stages of data

management as follows: a) Reduced data b)

Presentation of data and c) verification of data.

Qualitative data were taken from the results of student

activities and lecturers obtained through the

observation sheet. The data of the observation

resulting from the lecturer's learning using STAD

cooperative learning model in learning is assessed by

the formula: Value = Σ scores obtained divided by Σ

maximum scores and x 100 With the following

criteria: 86% good 70 - 85% = good 55 - 69% = good

enough 90% = Very good 80 - 90% = Good 70 - 79%

= Good enough 60 - 69% = Less <59% = Very Less.

The indicator of the success of classroom action

research is if the learning outcomes of students during

the learning process of each cycle has increased from

cycle 1 to cycle 2. This is marked by the completeness

of learning reaches at least 75% of the number of

existing students.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Pre-action test results of fiction analysis by the

students of Introduction to Literary Studies, English

Department of Andalas University Padang in the

second semester 2018 showed that their ability was

far from the minimum limit (75) which was only

28%.

Table 1: Students’ ability to analyse the elements of fiction

before a class action.

Pre-Action

Average

71,5

Number of Completion

9 (of 32)

Percentage of Completion

28%

This study focused on the application of STAD

cooperative learning method in this ILS class which

was conducted in two action cycles, each of which

was carried out in two meetings. In cycle I, after the

lecturer presented the material about fiction elements

and was guided by the distributed teaching materials,

the students discussed questions and answers about

the material and then discussed the story of Romeo

and Juliet. Through the teaching materials, students

answered some questions about the elements of the

story as suggested by Klarer (2004). After answering

the questions, students and lecturers corrected the

ICED-QA 2018 - International Conference On Education Development And Quality Assurance

134

answers. At the end of the cycle, students answered

some questions about the theme and elements of

Romeo and Juliet and retold it in front of the class.

The result of fiction element analysis in the form of

writing and oral presentation on cycle I can be seen

as follows:

Table 2: Results of Writing Ability.

Cycle I

Average

63,8

Number of Completion

12 (of 21)

Percentage of Completion

52%

The results of the evaluation of the writing test cycle

I shown an average of 63.8 with a complete student

as many as 12 people while the students who had not

completed as many as 11 students. Percentage of

completeness in the research cycle I was 52%.

Table 3: Results of Storytelling.

Cycle I

Average

76,9

Number of Completion

15 (of 21)

Percentage of Completion

76%

The results of the evaluation of the story telling test

shown that the cycle I obtain a higher average 76.9

with a complete student as many as 15 people while

unfinished students as many as six students.

Percentage mastery of ability in retelling theme and

fiction element in research of cycle I equal to 76%.

These results correlate with the learning process in

the classroom. Unfinished students were as many as

six students. Percentage mastery of ability in retelling

theme and fiction element in research of cycle I equal

to 76%. These results correlate with the learning

process in the classroom.

Table 4: Student Learning Process.

Cycle I

Discip

line

Inter

est

Particip

ation

Cooperati

veness

Serious

ness

Avera

3,6

3,2

2,7

2,8

Numb

er of

Good

Scores

Percen

tage

85,7%

81%

57%

71,4%

62%

In the observation of student activity in learning cycle

I, the average grades of discipline, interest, liveliness,

cooperation, and sincerity are 85.7%, 81%, 57%, &

1.4% and 62% respectively. So the average of student

activity in cycle I is 71, 4%. The teacher observation

resulting in learning cycle I ability of lecturer

including the ability to explain, give an example,

organize material, use of method and feedback is

good.

Table 5: The result of Writing Skill (A) and Story in front

of Class (B).

Cycle I

A+B: 2

Average

63,8

76,9

70,4

Number of

Completion

13,5

Percentage of

Completion

52%

By the success indicator in this study, the research in

the first cycle has not met the criteria of success

targeted by researchers (75%) and then the research

continued with cycle II.

In the early activities of Cycle II, the lecturer

greeted and checked the student attendance. The

lecturer re-explained the material that was learned in

previous week and explained the material to be

studied. Students listened to the material on themes

and elements of ‘The Necklace’ short story. The

lecturer asked the students about the material that has

not been understood. They were divided into groups

to do group work.

In the meeting 2 of the second cycle, the lecturer

gave a lesson about elements fiction analysis and then

the students answered a series of questions about the

Student Teams-Achievement Divisions

135

theme and the story elements of ‘The Necklace’ and

presented it orally in front of the class.

The results of the ability to write and present the

elements of fiction in cycle II can be seen as follows:

Table 6: Results of Writing Ability.

Cycle II

Average

Number of Completion

Percentage of Completion

77,7%

Based on the results of the evaluation of the writing

test cycle II, the average value of students is 76 with

a complete student as many as 17 students while the

unfinished as many as five students. Percentage

mastery is 77.7%.

Table 7: Ability to Retell a Story.

Cycle II

Average

77,7

Number of Completion

Percentage of

Completion

79,6%

The results of the evaluation of the test of telling the

theme and fiction elements of cycle II, obtained an

average of 77.7 with a complete student as many as

18 students while four unresolved students.

Percentage mastery reaches 79.6%.

Table 8: Test Results of Writing and Oral Presentation.

Cycle II

Average

79,6

77,7

78,7

17 0f 22

Number of

Completion

Percentage of

Completion

77,3%

The results of the evaluation of writing test and

storytelling cycle II indicated that there is an average

of 78.7 with a complete student as many as 17

students while the unfinished as many as five

students. Percentage of completion is 77.3%.

Table 9: Student Activities in Learning.

Cycle

Discipl

ine

Inter

est

Participa

tion

Coopera

tion

Serious

ness

Avera

3,7

3,3

3,2

Numb

er of

Comp

le-

tion

Perce

n-tage

91%

83%

78%

83%

The results of observation of student activity in

learning cycle II shown an average of learning

process value between 78% and 91%, the average

value of student learning process in cycle II is 82,6%.

In the observation of lecturer activity cycle II, the

lecturer's learning is good.

The improvement of student ability outcomes from

Pre Cycle, Cycle I and Cycle II in this study can be

seen in the following table.

Table 10: Improvement of Students’ Writing and Oral

Retelling.

Cycle II

Average

71,5

70.4

78,7

Number of

Completion

Percentage of

Completion

28%

52%

77,3%

The results of writing and storytelling tests with the

STAD method shown an increase in mastery of 28%

(pre-action), 52% Cycle I, and 77.3% Cycle II. The

number of students who completed the learning

achievement rose from 9 people (pre-action), 12

people (Cycle I) to 17 people (Cycle II).

ICED-QA 2018 - International Conference On Education Development And Quality Assurance

136

Table 11: Recapitulation of Quality Improvement Result of

Learning Process.

Indicators of Quality

Cycle I%

Cycle

II%

Student discipline in

following the learning of

fictional appreciation

18 (85,

7%)

21 (91%)

Students' interest in

following the learning of

fictional appreciation

17 (81%)

19 (83%)

Participation of students in

following learning of

fictional appreciation

12 (57%)

18 (78%)

Student cooperation in

following learning fiction

appreciation

15 (71,

4%)

18 (78%)

The seriousness of the

students in following the

learning of fictional

appreciation

13 (62%)

19 (83%)

The application of STAD method also shows the

improvement of the quality of student learning

process regarding discipline, interest, liveliness,

cooperation and sincerity which increases 3%, 2%,

6%, 3%, and 6% respectively from Cycle I to Cycle

II.

Table 12: Recapitulation of Fiction Appreciation

Enhancement.

Indicators

Pre-

action

Cycle

II%

The ability of

students to retell

the story orally

76,9

79,6

The ability of

students to answer

questions in

writing

71,5

63,8

77,7

Students' ability to

appreciate fiction

(Final score)

71,5

67,3

78,7

Completion

25%

52%

77,3%

From the results of this class action research, it

obtained the average value of writing skills on the

pre-cycle is 71.5 cycles I 63.8 and on the second cycle

77.7. In the pre-cycle, there are nine students who can

achieve mastery, in cycle I there are 12 students and

on the second cycle as many as 17 students.

Percentage mastery of students on pre-cycle 28%, the

cycle I 63, 6% and on cycle II 77, 3%. The percentage

of success obtained by students on learning in cycle

II has reached the percentage of success that has been

established by researchers (75%). It can be stated that

the classroom action research to improve the ability

of fictional analysis in the subject of Introduction to

Literary Studies by using collaborative model STAD

by the students of English Literature Faculty of

Cultural Sciences Andalas University has been

successful.

4 CONCLUSION

The results of classroom action research on

Introduction to Literary Studies class by using STAD

collaborative model on the first year students of

Department of English Literature Faculty of

Humanities Unhand indicated that STAD can

improve students’ writing skill and makes learning

more fun and meaningful for students because they

can participate actively in learning activities. In

addition, learning using STAD model can improve

the ability of fiction analysis as well. This is

evidenced by the increased learning achievement of

students during the learning process. Improvement is

also shown by lecturers who shift from lessons that

are still dominated by lecturers into more varied

learning models.

This can be seen from the increasing completeness

of ILS learning outcomes. Before the action is given,

students' learning completion is 20%. After the action

on the first cycle there is an increase in the

completeness of learning outcomes with a percentage

of 52%. In the second cycle, there is another increase

in the completeness of learning outcomes by

achieving a percentage of 77% or as many as 17

students from 22 students. It is highly suggested that

lecturers consider the model of cooperative learning

such as student teams achievement divisions (STAD)

in literary learning, because it has proven to improve

the student learning outcomes.

REFERENCES

Arikunto, Suharsimi. 2007. Penelitian Tindakan Kelas.

Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara.

Isjoni. 2008. Pembelajaran Kooperatif. Yogyakarta:

Pustaka Belajar.

Student Teams-Achievement Divisions

137

Kemmis & Taggart. 1988. The Action Research Planner,

3rd edition. Waurn Ponds: Deakin University.

Klarer, Mario. 2004. An Introduction to Literary Studies.

London: Routledge, 2004.

Lie, Anita. 2008. Cooperative Learning. Jakarta: PT

Grasindo.

Purnama, Galih. 2013. Upaya Peningkatan Prestasi Belajar

dengan Metode Pembelajaran Kooperatif Invetigasi

Kelompok (Group Investigation) Mata Pelajaran Seni

Budaya (Seni Musik) pada Mahasiswa Kelas IX A SMP

Negeri 3 71 Ambarawa. Karya Tulis Ilmiah. S1 Jurusan

Pendidikan Seni Musik FBS Universitas Negeri

Yogyakarta.

Rofiq, M. Aunur. 2010. Pembelajaran Kooperatif

(cooperative learning) dalam Pengajaran Pendidikan

Agama Islam. Jurnal Falasifa, V(1): 9.

Slavin, Robert E. (1980). Cooperative Learning.

Specialization, 50(2): 315-342.

Sudjana, Nana. 2009. Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar

Mengajar. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.

Sukardi, H. M. 2008. Evaluasi Pendidikan: Prinsip dan

Operasionalnya. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.

Suyono, Hariyanto. 2012. Belajar dan pembelajaran.

Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.

ICED-QA 2018 - International Conference On Education Development And Quality Assurance

138