Improvement of Community Responsibility of SGD (Small Group

Discussion) Method

Zulfikar Muhammad

and Muhasim

Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Kesehatan Kepanjen, Jalan Trunojoyo, Krajan, Panggungrejo, Kepanjen, Malang, Indonesia 65163

Keywords: Disaster Disaster Village, Small Group Discussions, Community Resilience, Disasters.

Abstract: The aim of the study was to find out whether disaster resilient village socialization using the SGD (Small

Group Discussions) method could affect the resilience of the community in dealing with disaster risk. This

study uses a quantitative method with a pre-experimental design, and with a one-group pretest-posttest

approach. The group was pretested before the treatment, then after being treated, the group was posttest. The

instrument used a community resilience questionnaire. The number of samples were 35 respondents, using

cluster sampling techniques. The data obtained were analyzed using the t test with significance ρ <0.05. The

results of this study indicate that the average value of community resilience prior to socialization was 103.20,

while the average value of community resilience after socialization was 163.23. The significance value for

paired samples correlations is 0.09, which means there is no significant relationship between community

resilience before and after socialization, while the paired sample test significance value is 0.00, which means

that there is a significant effect between community resilience before and after socialization. This study can

be concluded that there was an increase in the resilience of the people of Sumberrejo Poncokusumo Village

after the dissemination of resilient villages using the SGD method.

1 INTRODUCTION

Indonesia is a country that is located at the confluence

of 3 active plates of the earth (the Indo-Australian

plate, Euro Asia, Pacific) which results in the

emergence of earthquake and active volcanoes. From

these natural phenomena Indonesia has 129 active

volcanoes, thus some regions in Indonesia have the

potential for disasters (Adiyoso, 2018). Malang

Regency is included in the pathway of the Eurasian

plate meeting with the Indo-Australian plate. The

meeting of the plates is 200 km south. With the

passage of the two plates meeting, then in the

Regency of Malang the potential for tectonic

earthquake disaster (Irjaya and Pamungkas, 2014).

Disasters are events or series of events that threaten

and disrupt people's lives and livelihoods caused,

both by natural factors and / or non-natural factors

and human factors, resulting in human casualties,

environmental damage, property losses, and

psychological impacts (Law RI No. 24, 2007).

The threat of disaster cannot be eliminated, but it

can be overcome in various ways. Therefore, it is

necessary to take strategic steps to reduce or

minimize the impact of losses or damage that can be

caused by disasters. The government, in this case

passing the National National Agency for Prevention,

has compiled a number of Programs to deal with

various disaster threats, both preventive, mitigating

and responding to disasters to rehabilitation and

reconstruction after disasters.

One of the government's efforts in managing

various disaster threats is to carry out community-

based prevention programs, namely forming a

Disaster-Resilient Village (Destana). Disaster

Resilient Village in general is a program of

strengthening community activities in disaster risk

areas. The purpose of the Resilient Village Disaster

program is to shape the community to be resilient or

prepared to face disasters.

According to the Indonesian Institute of Sciences

(LIPI) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific

and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in Husna,

2011) said that there are five factors that can affect

community resilience, including: 1) knowledge and

attitudes towards disaster risk, 2 ) policies and

guidelines, 3) plans for disaster emergencies, 4)

disaster warning systems, 5) ability to mobilize

resources.

Muhammad, Z. and Muhasim, .

Improvement of Community Responsibility of SGD (Small Group Discussion) Method.

DOI: 10.5220/0009122300730076

In Proceedings of the 2nd Health Science International Conference (HSIC 2019), pages 73-76

ISBN: 978-989-758-462-6

To support government programs to improve

community resilience, knowledge about rural

resilient villages needs to be provided. This can be

done by several methods, one of which is SGD (Small

Group Discussion). The higher the level of

community knowledge the higher the resilience of the

community in dealing with disasters (Frankenberg et

al., 2013)

Muis and Anwar, (2018) developed a model of

community preparedness in dealing with disasters by

using participatory activities. From the results of the

research on the development of the model, it was

found that there was an increase in public knowledge,

but public awareness was still not reaching the

expectations. Therefore, by using Small Group

Discussion (SGD), the community can play an active

role so as to increase knowledge as well as public

awareness.

Small Group Discussion (SGD) is one of the

methods developed in the last 40 years (Qamar,

Ahmad and Niaz, 2015). This method consists of

tutorials, seminars and problem-solving sessions by

small groups. A small group is a group of people with

a limited number who interact with each other. This

group consists of 8-12 members.

Soifa (2018) said that the SGD method can

improve student competency. In this study showed

that after the SGD method there was a change in the

situation in the classroom, students were more active

than before. Students become actively involved in the

learning process. The classroom atmosphere becomes

more dynamic during the learning process. By

discussing texts, doing assignments in groups,

students are more motivated to improve their reading

competency skills.

Research conducted by Afrilia, Eka and Sari

(2018) states that the SGD method can increase the

knowledge of pregnant women groups. Knowledge

enhancement occurs after group members interact

with each other and discuss a problem. Each group

member is active in discussing one topic that has been

given.

However, this method requires adequate

facilitators to accommodate each group. The

facilitator also needs to pay attention to group

members who are less active in the discussion

process. This method also requires adequate facilities

and infrastructure to support the smooth learning

process (Ulfah, 2017).

The purpose of this study is to determine the effect

of providing methods Small Group Discussion (SGD)

to the resilience of the people of Sumberejo Village.

2 METHODS

This study uses a quantitative method with a Pre-

Experimental design, and uses approach One Group

petest-posttest. Groups were given a pretest about

community resilience before treatment. The treatment

consisted of, first, the group was given education

about the concept of the Resilient Village of

Disasters. Second, groups are divided into small

groups according to their region. Third, each group

was given problems related to the threat of disasters,

vulnerability and capacity in the area of each group.

After treatment, each group was given a posttest. The

number of samples in the study were 35 people. The

sampling technique uses purposive sampling. The

instrument used in this study was to use a community

resilience questionnaire with 51 question items

consisting of 5 domains (knowledge of disaster risk,

disaster risk assessment, planning of activities to

reduce disaster risk, implementation of disaster risk

reduction activities, communication systems and

governance). Data analysis using t test with a

significance of ρ <0.05.

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results of this study showed that community

resilience before treatment was averaged 103.2.

While after treatment the average community

toughness was 163.23. The results can be seen in table

Before the t test was performed, the data was

tested for normality in advance using the test saphiro

wilk, because it is an absolute requirement when using

the t test (Sugiyono, 2011). From these tests it was

found that the pretest data test value of 0.407. While

the posttest data test value of 0.354. From these

results it can be concluded that the data are normally

distributed and can be continued for t test. These

results can be seen in table 2.

While the results of the t test can be seen in table

3. From these test results indicate that the correlation

value of 0.09 which means there is no significant

relationship between SGD methods with community

resilience. From the table shows that the value ρ

<0.05 which means there is a significant influence

between the SGD method on community resilience.

HSIC 2019 - The Health Science International Conference

Table 1: Distribution of respondents based on average

community resilience at pretest and posttest.

Mean N Std.

Deviation

Std.

Error

Mean

PreTest 103.20 35 45.433 7.680

PostTest 163.23 35 11,725 1,982

Table 2: Data Normality Test Results.

Kolmogorov-

Smirnov (a)

Shapiro-Wilk

Statis

tics

Df Sig. Statist

ics

Df Sig.

PreTest .118 35 .200 .969 35 .407

PostTest .079 35 .200 .966 35 .354

Table 3: Paired Samples Correlations Test.

N Correlation Sig.

Pair

pretest and

post-test

35 .291 .090

Table 4: Test Samples Test Paired.

t df Sig. (2-tailed)

Pair 1 Pretest-

posttest

-8.165 64 .000

Socialization using themethod Small Group

Discussion (SGD) can improve community

resilience. In line with research conducted by Afrilia,

Eka and Sari (2018) who said that counseling using

the SGD method can improve one's knowledge. In the

SGD method each group member plays an active role

in solving a given problem, so that it will indirectly

increase the knowledge of the group members. In this

method of learning centered on students (Snider,

2017).

The SGD process carried out by each group was

accompanied by facilitators who had been trained

before by disaster experts. So if there are problems

that are not yet understood, they can be discussed or

asked to the facilitator. Thus the knowledge of each

group member will increase.

One of the factors that influence community

resilience is knowledge (Husna, 2011). Themethod

Small Group Discussion (SGD)can improve one's

knowledge (Afifah, Ekawati and Tarmi, 2018). In this

study, each group was given a stimulus by providing

socialization about the Tangguh Disaster Village,

then discussing issues related to the threatening

disasters in their respective regions. Knowledge

improvement occurs because each group member

actively participates in discussions, all group

members express their opinions, ask the facilitator

and solve common problems.

Another factor of resilience is planning during

emergencies (Husna, 2011). In the SGD process each

group formulates a plan, starting from determining

disaster risk-prone areas to planning the direction of

evacuation in the event of a disaster. Each group is

also instructed to make a disaster risk map in

accordance with the conditions of their respective

regions.

The next factor is the disaster warning system

(Husna, 2011). Related to this factor, each group

plans a communication system in the event of a

disaster in accordance with the conditions in their

respective regions. Like using a block or speaker at a

place of worship.

After the SGD process, each group presented the

results of their discussion at a large forum. Each

group will get input from other groups and also from

the expert team. So that each group will influence and

interact with each other (Moussa, Campero and

Almaatouq, 2018).

Small Group Discussion (SGD)can also help in

solving a problem (Fransiska, Sudira and Wardani,

2016). The problems given to each group are related

to the threat of disasters that occur around their area.

Groups are given stimulus problems about what they

do if the threat of disaster occurs to them. The group

will discuss their plans, thus each group plays an

active role to express their ideas in solving the

problem.

4 CONCLUSIONS

From the results and discussion above, this study can

be concluded that there is no significant relationship

between Disaster Resuscitation socialization using

method Small Group Discussion (SGD) to increase

community resilience in Sumberejo Poncokusumo

Village. But there is a significant influence between

the socialization of Destana by using the SGD method

to increase community resilience.

REFERENCES

Adiyoso, W. (2018) Disaster Management: Introduction &

Strategic Issues.

Afifah, M., Ekawati, H. and Tarmi, W. (2018) ‘The

influence of small group discussion on knowledge of

dysmenorrhea in students at SMPN 2 Kepohbaru,

Bojonegoro Regency’, Surya, 8(1).

Improvement of Community Responsibility of SGD (Small Group Discussion) Method

Afrilia, Eka, M. and Sari, H. (2018) ‘The Relationship

between Small Group Discussion (SGD) Counseling

Methods and Anemia Knowledge Level in Pregnant

Women at the Midwifery Hospital in Medika,

Tangerang City’, JKFT Journal, 3, pp. 79–85.

Frankenberg, E. et al. (2013) ‘Education, vulnerability, and

resilience after a natural disaster’, Ecology and Society,

18, p. 2. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-

05377-180216.

Fransiska, N., Sudira, P. and Wardani, N. (2016) ‘Small

Group Discussion of Vital Components In Problem-

Based Learning.’

Husna, C. (2011) ‘Factors Affecting Disaster Preparedness

In Rsudza Banda Aceh Influencing Factors on Disaster

Preparedness in RSUDZA Banda Aceh’, Idea Nursing

Journal, 3(2), pp. 10–19.

Irjaya, N. and Pamungkas, A. (2014) ‘Determination of

Tectonic Earthquake Vulnerability Zones in Malang

Regency, South Region’, Journal of Pomits

Engineering, 3(2), pp. 107–112.

Law RI No. 24 (2007).

Moussa, M., Campero, A. and Almaatouq, A. (2018)

‘Dynamical networks of influence in small group

discussions’, Plos One, pp. 1–14. Available at:

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190541.

Muis, I. and Anwar, K. (2018) ‘Community Preparedness

Model in Landslide Disaster Risk Reduction in

Tugumukti Village, Cisarua District, West Bandung

Regency Abstract Community Preparedness Model in

Landslide Disaster Risk Reduction in Tugumukti

Village, Cisarua Subdistric’, 3(4), pp. 19–30.

Qamar, M., Ahmad, A. and Niaz, K. (2015) ‘Low-through

-small output discussions of conversions in electrics’,

Pak Armed Forces Med J, 65(3).

Snider, J. S. (2017) Factors That Influence Teachers’ Use,

Or Non-Use, Of Small Group Discussion. Wayne State

University.

Soifa, U. (2018) ‘Small Group Discussion Method to

Improve Competency Reading Text Hortatory

Exposition’, Journal of Research and Educational

Studies, 8(2), pp. 137–153.

Sugiyono (2011) Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif

dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Ulfah, H. (2017) ‘Evaluation of Implementation of Sgd

(Small Group Discussion) Learning Method’.

HSIC 2019 - The Health Science International Conference