The Development of Kolangs Learning Model for Learning Running

Material for Children's with Mental Disabilities in SMPLB

Aditya Arif Rachman

, Sumaryanti

Yogyakarta State University Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Sport Science, Yogyakarta State University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Keywords: Kolangs Learning, Basic Techniques, Running

Abstract: The purpose of this study is to produce a Kolangs learning model for learning running material for mentally

retarded students in SMPLB. The approach taken in this research was research and development. The

subjects of this study were the VII grade students of junior high school. Small-scale trials were conducted to

six students of grade VII Sukoharjo SMPLB Public School. A large-scale trial was conducted to 20 students

of grade VII SMPLB B-C YPAALB Langenharjo Sukoharjo and grade VII students of SMPLB B-C

HAMONG PUTRO Jombor Sukoharjo. The effectiveness test was carried out on six students of grade VII

SMPLB ABCD YSD Polokarto Sukoharjo. In collecting the data, instruments used were: (1) interview

guidelines, (2) observation guidelines, and (3) GPAI. The techniques to analyze the data were carried out in

quantitative descriptive analysis and qualitative descriptive analysis. The results of this study are in the form

of Kolangs learning model for learning running material for mentally retarded children in the SMPLB. From

the assessment results of the experts and practitioners, the Kolangs learning model had a validity of 0.988.

Based on the results of the effectiveness test, the percentage value of Kolangs learning models represented

that it was a very effective learning model and it could improve the skills of start, run, and finish, as well as

the affective aspects, consisting of cooperation, discipline, and sportsmanship. In addition, the Kolangs

learning model was also very suitable with the characteristics, growth, and development of the students and

it allowed the students to easily learn the basic running techniques in the SMPLB.

1 INTRODUCTION

Learning to run as school subject is considered to be

less attractive and only basic techniques are taught,

making students less enthusiastic or not interested in

learning the subject. The teacher provided

explanations and divided some tasks and technical

exercises without providing an interesting way of

learning that makes students feel bored in the

teaching and learning process. The results of the

observations showed that 7 out of 10 teachers

generally gave lecture model and directly explained

the basic technical material. In delivering the

learning material, 3 out of 10 teachers delivered the

materials using video learning guides. In addition,

from the results of observations, physical education

teachers only provided warming up, lectures, and

direct practice. The students could only do the basic

techniques without knowing whether the techniques

are right or wrong. The learning atmosphere was

direct so that students could develop their potentials,

which means that the education process must be

oriented to the students. Therefore, the students must

be seen as developing and potential organisms. The

teachers are required to not only provide materials or

force the students, but also develop the students’

potentials. Therefore, the students can memorize the

materials and facts. In other words, they can do

something beyond their abilities.

Dimyati (2009) says that learning is all activities

new ability or value in a systematic process through

the stages of design, implementation, and evaluation

in the context of learning activities. Basically,

learning process must educate the students to

understand the appropriate learning process and can

encourage the students to develop their abilities

optimally. Next, Dimyati (2009) says, "teaching-

learning process is an activity of teachers which are

programmed in instructional design, to make

students learn actively, which emphasizes the

provision of learning resources."

Rachman, A. and Sumaryanti, .

The Development of Kolangs Learning Model for Learning Running Material for Children’s with Mental Disabilities in SMPLB.

DOI: 10.5220/0009209300270036

In Proceedings of the 3rd Yogyakarta International Seminar on Health, Physical Education, and Sport Science in conjunction with the 2nd Conference on Interdisciplinary Approach in Sports

(YISHPESS and CoIS 2019), pages 27-36

ISBN: 978-989-758-457-2

From seven SMPLB being observed, Sukoharjo

State SMPLB, Surakarta State Senior High School,

Surakarta SMPLB YAAT, BC YPAALB

Langenharjo SMPLB Sukoharjo, BC HAMONG

PUTRO Jombor Sukoharjo SMPLB, YSD Polokarto

ABCD SMPLB, and Abc Tawangsari SMPLB

Sukoharjo, six SMPLB still administered teacher-

centered models so that the students were not

actively involved in learning. The students were

sometimes required to match some notions regarding

the materials. The impact was on the students’ low

scores and there were some students whose grades

were far from the minimum criteria of learning

mastery (KKM). From 20 students, only five

students scored above the KKM. This is still far

from the expectations in running class.

Learning model is a plan or a pattern that is used

as a guide in planning the learning. Every learning

model has its advantages and disadvantages. The

Kolangs learning model is a new breakthrough of

learning model based on a combination of

cooperative models, in order to cover the

shortcomings of each learning model with a more

complex unitary model. The Kolangs learning model

contains interesting games that teach basic running

techniques. This can make the students more

interested in participating the learning session

because the learning is not monotonous as it keeps

changing but the learning goal remains.

Kolangs learning is a packaged combination of

learning model that is interrelated and

complementary to each other in order to create an

ideal learning. This is in accordance with what was

stated by Muslich (2010) that there are five

principles of learning activities that can develop the

potential of students, namely: (1) learner-centered

activities, (2) learning through doing, (3) developing

intellectual, emotional, spiritual, and social

intelligence, (4) lifelong learning, (5) independent

learning and learning to work together.

The essence of the formal education process is

teaching, while the core of the teaching process is

learning. Therefore, teaching cannot be separated

from learning, so the learning process in educational

terms is called the teaching and learning process

(PBM) (Ali, 2008). On the other hand, Rosdiani

(2012) said, "teaching-learning process is the

process of interaction between students and their

environment, so that there are better behavior

changes."

The special characteristics of the learning model

are: (1) logical theoretical rationales compiled by the

creators or developers. The learning model has a

reasonable theory of thinking. The creator or

developer makes a theory by considering his theory

with actual reality and does not fictitiously create

and develop it, (2) rationale for what and how

learners learn (learning objectives to be achieved).

The learning model has clear goals about what will

be achieved, including what and how learners learn

well and how to solve the learning problems, (3)

teaching behavior. It is needed so that the model can

be implemented successfully. Thus, the ideal

teaching can be successfully achieved in its

implementation, (4) learning environment needed.

Hence, the learning objectives can be achieved. The

learning model must have a conducive and

comfortable learning environment, so that the

learning atmosphere can be one of the supporting

aspects of the learning goals.

According to Rumini (1993) children aged 12/13

to 17/18 are still classified as early teens. At this

time, students want to find their identities and to be

valued as individuals. Viewed from the physical and

psychological development of the students, the

students from SMPLB are not yet mature.

Furthermore, Rumini (1993) says that physical

growth as well as psychological state in early

adolescents has not developed maximally. By seeing

the changes in adolescence, it can be concluded that

adolescents want to actualize themselves and their

existence as individuals want to be recognized by

others. Adolescence basically also experiences

biological or physiological changes in

psychological. According to Agustiani (2006),

changes in adolescents and interactions during

adolescence are physical, emotional, cognitive, and

psychosocial implications.

Learning for students is also associated with the

learning model used by the teacher. The model is

defined as a conceptual framework that is used as a

guideline in carrying out activities. It can be defined

as: (1) a type or design, (2) a description or analogy

used to assist the process of visualizing something

that cannot be directly observed, (3) a system of

assumptions, data, inferences used to describe an

object or event mathematically, (4) a simplified

design, (5) a description of a real or imaginary

system, and (6) a reduced representation in order to

explain and show the nature of the original form

(Sukmadinata, 2012).

The learning model has four aspects of

development, namely: (1) steps (syntax), explaining

how the implementation of a model, the form of

activities to be carried out, how to start it, and what

the next action gradually done, (2) the social system

that supports the implementation of each model,

explains how the structuring plan and the

YISHPESS and CoIS 2019 - The 3rd Yogyakarta International Seminar on Health, Physical Education, and Sport Science (YISHPESS

2019) in conjunction with The 2nd Conference on Interdisciplinary Approach in Sports (CoIS 2019)

relationship of students and teachers, as well as the

norms that build the relationship, (3) the principle of

interaction between students and teachers,

explaining the dynamic role of teacher and students

in each model. In other words, the teacher can be a

guide, facilitator, motivator, and assignor, (4)

explanation of the support system, this system is

outside the learning model but it is one of the

conditions that determine the level of success of the

learning models implemented (Rosdiani, 2012).

The development of learning models would be

better if it involves some aspects, like the ones

determined by Bloom (1956) in Himberg,

Hitchinson, & Roussell (2003), namely there are six

levels of cognitive aspects as follows: (1)

knowledge, (2) comprehension, (3) application, (4)

analysis, (5) synthesis, and (6) evaluation. Affective

aspects have five levels, namely: (1) receiving, (2)

responding, (3) valuing, (4) organizing, and (5)

characterizing. Psychomotor aspects have three

levels, namely: (1) direct observation and

assessment of students' behavior during learning, (2)

giving tests to students to measure knowledge, skills,

and attitudes after participating in teaching and

learning process, and (3) when the learning is

finished. Thus, the learning process will run better if

the process involves some models in order to create

positive interest from students in the teaching and

learning process. Kolangs learning which is based

on a combination of cooperative and direct learning

models is a learning model used in this study,

especially in running subject. The students have

different levels of intelligence, therefore the way

they learn the basic running techniques is different

between one and the others. To overcome this,

Kolangs learning, the newer method, is created to

provide more acceptable learning to students from

those who have a high level of intelligence to

students who have a low level of intelligence.

According to Rosdiani, (2012) the best physical

education learning process is achieved when it

involves three aspects of learning: cognitive,

affective, and psychomotor.

Therefore, it is expected that students can be

interested in following the learning process because

learning will be more varied and tend to be not

monotonous as in the conventional methods.

Learners at the upper middle level will tend to like

and try new things. By using this developed learning

model, students are expected to master the skills,

cognitive, and affective easily. It is because this

learning model provides character education so that

the students are expected to not only prioritize

individual egos, but be able to socialize with their

classmates.

There are some basic running game techniques

that must be mastered by students, namely start, run,

and finish. These three basic techniques are

inseparable in running games. Each movement has

its own purpose. The start movement aims to start

the run properly. The aim of the run is to move

properly and quickly towards the finish. The finish

movement aims to level the time.

According to Hergenhahn & Olson (2008) the

most basic form of learning is repetition. Learning is

gradual rather than direct, in other words learning is

done with systematic small steps. In developing

learning models in Physical Education, the

applicable curriculum must be considered, so that

the products are in accordance with the

characteristics of the students (Rosdiani, 2012).

Curriculum is the experiences and activities planned

by the school which aims at modifying student

behavior towards expected behavior (Suherman,

2001). The physical education curriculum is part of

the overall school curriculum which contributes to

the philosophy, goals and objectives of education.

In physical education, it is expected that the

students are given the freedom to explore and

develop their talents and potential to maximally

support their growth and development. In

accordance with the demands of the 2013

curriculum, the students must be more active

meaning that they are given more space to find out

their talents and potential. From a number of

opinions expressed by experts, it can be concluded

that the learning model in physical education is a

learning model which is created to deliver materials

about motion activities to support the body's

development of students through interesting game

models and media.

The implementation of running learning with the

Kolangs learning model is easy and can attract the

attention and interest of students because learners do

not only learn one basic technique movement but

learn some basic techniques in different games. The

Kolangs learning model for this running game

consists of six games, namely: (1) Regional Marking

Games, (2) Taking Wild Ball, (3) Happy Games, (4)

Zigzag Running, (5) Relay Run, (6) Fun Run.

Each game has characteristics to improve

running skills. These skills will be elaborated as

follows: (1) Kolangs learning model can improve the

skills of start through Regional Marking Games,

Happy Games, Zigzag Running, Relay Run, Fun

Run, (2) Kolangs learning model can improve

running skills in the SMPLB through Regional

The Development of Kolangs Learning Model for Learning Running Material for Children’s with Mental Disabilities in SMPLB

Marker Games, Taking Wild Ball, Happy Game,

Relay Run, Fun Run, (3) Kolangs learning model

can improve Finish skills in SMPLB through game

Regional Marking, Taking Wild Ball, Happy Game,

Zigzag Run, Relay Run, Fun Run, (4) Kolangs

learning model can improve student cooperation

which is characterized by having cooperative

attitude with their group mates and disciplined

attitude towards running learning, (5) Kolangs

learning models improve the students’

sportsmanship which is characterized by

competitives attitudes between groups in each game

performed, (6) Kolangs teaching model is able to

make students easier to learn basic techniques of

running which is characterized by being more active

and happier. It was because the learning of Kolangs

can facilitate and explore learners on improving

basic techniques with activities in running games

with physical activity on the basic running technique

of start, run and finish.

From the description above it can be concluded

that Kolangs learning model is interpreted as a series

of learning activities carried out by students to

analyze and find a basic concept in small and

heterogeneous groups with the teacher guidance.

Hence, the learning process is structured and

feedbacks can be obtained by the students. This

learning model can be used to develop cognitive

aspects in the form of appropriate decision making

in each game, affective aspects in the form of

cooperation, sportsmanship, as well as discipline,

and psychomotor aspects in the form of mastering

basic running skills, namely start, run, and finish.

2 RESEARCH METHODS

2.1 Type of Research

The type of research is research and development.

Sukmadinata (2010) said that research development

or often referred to as research and development

(R&D) is a process or step to develop a new product

or improve existing products.

2.2 Time and Place of Research

The research was carried out in March until July.

Small-scale trials were carried out at Sukoharjo

SMPLB Public School. A large-scale trial was

conducted in YPAALB Langenharjo B-C SMPLB

Sukoharjo and VII grade students of BPL-B-C

HAMONG PUTRO Jombor Sukoharjo.

Effectiveness test was carried out in YSD Polokarto

Sukoharjo ABCD SMPLB.

2.3 Research Subject

This research classified the subject test into two,

namely: the subject of a small group trial,

administering six students at VII grade of Sukoharjo

State Senior High School. The subjects of the large

group trial in the development research were 20

students at VII grade of SMPLB B-C YPAALB

Langenharjo Sukoharjo and VII grade students of

SMPLB B-C HAMONG PUTRO Jombor

Sukoharjo. In addition, six students of grade VII of

SMPLB ABCD YSD Polokarto Sukoharjo tested the

effectiveness of the final product.

The technique of determining the trial subjects in

this research was simple random sampling method.

According to Sugiyono (2011), simple random

sampling is a sampling technique that provides equal

opportunities for each element (member) of the

population to be selected as a sample member or

subject.

2.4 Procedure

The procedure in this study was adapted from the

development model of Sugiyono (2010), covering 10

steps that must be implemented, namely: (1)

information gathering, (2) planning, (3) initial

product development, (4) initial trials, (5) revisions

to compile main products, (6) main field trials, (7)

revisions to compile operational products, (8) trials

of operational products, (9) revisions of final

products, and (10) dissemination and

implementation of development products. The

results of the dissemination products can later be

widely implemented by educators, SMPLB teachers

and education activists according to the age and

characters of the students.

Dwiyoga (2004) states that each researcher can

choose and determine the most appropriate step for

the research based on the conditions and obstacles

encountered. Based on this opinion, in this research

the simplification procedure was carried out in

accordance with the constraints and conditions in the

study.

These steps were adapted into eight development

research procedure designs, namely: (1) collecting

information in the field, (2) analyzing the products

to be developed, (3) developing initial products, (4)

conducting expert validation, (5) conducting small-

scale trials and revisions, (6) conducting trials large-

YISHPESS and CoIS 2019 - The 3rd Yogyakarta International Seminar on Health, Physical Education, and Sport Science (YISHPESS

2019) in conjunction with The 2nd Conference on Interdisciplinary Approach in Sports (CoIS 2019)

scale and revised, (7) making final products, and (8)

conducting effectiveness tests.

The effectiveness test was carried out to find out

the effectiveness of the learning material in the

running subject. The final product testing was done

in order to find out whether the product that had

been produced is feasible and has advantages in the

level of model implementation in the field. The

effectiveness test used was in the form of

experiment. The steps to implementing the

experiment were carried out through 3 stages,

namely: (1) pretest (2) implementation of the

treatment (3) posttest.

2.5 Data, Instruments, and Data

Collection Techniques

The data obtained in this study were qualitative and

quantitative data. The qualitative data were the data

obtained from the results of expert judgements of the

material and practitioners' validation in the form of

comments, input, or suggestions to determine the

feasibility level of Kolangs learning products. The

quantitative data were based on the data obtained

from the response scores from experts and students

to measure the product feasibility, as well as from

assessment scores in the experimental data to

determine the effectiveness of the developed

Kolangs learning model.

The data collection instruments in this study

were the instruments to collect empirical data in the

effort to draft a model. The instruments needed to

draft a model consist of: (1) interview guidelines, (2)

scale of values, (3) observation guidelines, and (4)

documentation.

Interview was the technique used in collecting

the data, by conducting direct communication using

interview guidelines as a data collection tool. The

questions prepared were adjusted to the purpose of

conducting the interviews, to explore the learning

process in the SMPLB especially about physical

education learning for students and the obstacles

faced by teachers regarding physical education

learning in running games to support the background

of research problems. Value scale was used to assess

the feasibility of game models developed before the

implementation of small-scale trials. After the

experts considered that the learning model was in

line with the elements in the value scale, a new game

model could be tested in a small-scale trial.

Observation was one of the data collection

techniques that not only measures the attitudes of

respondents (interviews and questionnaires) but can

also be used to record various phenomena that occur

(situations and conditions). Documentation was

done to search and collect the data in the form of

notes, transcripts, books, newspapers, magazines,

minutes, report cards, agendas, and so forth.

Documentation method was intended to obtain the

data based on the existing data sources in schools,

namely in the form of school profiles, organizational

structure, and results of the assessment. Other

instruments used in this study were lesson plan and

syllabus. The four instruments were used to obtain

the data related to the ability of the teacher, the

learning process and the facilities and infrastructure

used.

To obtain the feasibility of the instruments used,

the steps taken were: (1) compiling the instructional

guidelines, (2) consulting the instrument guidelines

to the experts or validators, (3) arranging the items

of the instrument, (4) consulting the instruments to

the experts or validators to get a valid instrument.

The test given to students was the GPAI (Game

Performance Assessment Instrument) test that has

been validated by experts consisting of cognitive,

affective, and psychomotor tests.

2.6 Data Analysis Technique

The results were analyzed using qualitative and

quantitative descriptive analysis techniques. The

contents or material data which were in the form of

comments, suggestions from the experts and the

students, and the results of researchers’ observations

during the trial process were analyzed descriptively

by using qualitative method, and concluded as input

to improve or revise the developed products. While

in the form of data scores of responses of material

experts and students obtained through questionnaires

were analyzed descriptively quantitatively with

percentage techniques and categorization.

The steps used to determine the product

eligibility criteria were developed by changing the

data obtained from the questionnaires in the form of

responses to interval data. In the questionnaire, five

choices were provided using a Likert scale to

provide feedback about the developed product. The

categories in the scale were 4, 3, 2, 1 classified as

very good, good, good enough, and not good

respectively.

The instruments made must be examined by the

teacher to find out the readability, the substance

being asked, and the language used. The results of

the study were used to improve the instrument, and

then the instrument was tested in the field. The

categorization of assessments can be seen in Table 1.

The Development of Kolangs Learning Model for Learning Running Material for Children’s with Mental Disabilities in SMPLB

Table 1: Categorization of kolangs learning model of

running for mentally retarded children in the SMPLB.

Game Model Score

Rating Category

≥ 96

Very good / very effective

72 – 95

Good / effective

48 – 71

Good enough / quite effective

≤ 47

Not good / ineffective

Information:

1. The lower limit of the highly effective

category is 0.80 x 120 = 96, and the upper

limit is 96.

2. The lower limit score in good or effective

category is 0.60 x 120 = 72, and the upper

limit score is 72.

3. The lower limit score in good enough or quite

effective category is 0.40 x 120 = 48, and the

upper limit is 48.

4. The scores classified as not good or

ineffective when they are less than or equal to

47.

2.6 Research Results and Discussion

The product produced through research and

development was Kolangs learning model for

administering game of running in SMPLB which

contains learning steps of eight games. Each game

contains cognitive, affective, and psychomotor

elements that are integrated in the game. In this case,

the overall criteria in learning was very effective to

be applied to the VII grade students of SMPLB.

Validity test and reliability test were conducted to

find out which instruments were valid and reliable.

Kolangs learning model was declared valid because

the values of r count were 0.881, 0.898, 0.881, and

0.879, which were more than r table, 0.801.

Furthermore, Kolangs learning model was reliable

because the value of r count was 0.988> than 0.6.

Further explanation can be seen in Appendix 14 on

page 165. Generally, there were five models in very

good categories and one model in good category.

The detailed explanation of each game model is

discussed as follows.

The Regional Marking Game was included in the

very good category with an average score of 108.75,

having percentage of 90.63%. The things causing the

Regional Marking Game was in very good category

are explained as follows. a) The game developed the

ability of students to find their own right foot

position on the basic technique of running in groups

and the students are required to think and work

together when performing the games. b) The

students looked happy and active when playing the

Marking Game. d) The Marking Game equiped the

students to have the ability to carry out basic

techniques in playing a ball-free running game and it

was encouraged game for students. d. the game was

oriented to the needs of the learners and it could

explore basic techniques of learning activities,

including start, run, and finish correctly. e. the game

developed the students’ ability to work together and

motivated them to interact with other students. f. the

game encouraged the students to solve problems and

it also encouraged them to comply with regulations.

Happy Game was also included in the very good

category with an average score of 113.00, having

percentage of 94.17%. Things that cause the Happy

Game model was in the very good category is

explained as follows: a. it developed the students’

ability in the right footsteps and steps when running

in the game and the students were required to think.

b. the students looked happy and active when

playing the Happy Game. c. the game equiped the

students to have the ability to use the right foot to

step up and it delighted the students. d. the game

was oriented to the needs of students and it could

explore learning activities regarding the basic

techniques, including start, run and finish in short

distance running. e. the game developed the ability

of students to work together and it motivated them to

interact with other students. f. the game encouraged

the students to solve problems and it encouraged

them to comply with regulations.

Zigzag Running Game was included in the very

good category with an average score of 102.75,

having percentage of 85.63%. The things causing the

Zigzag Running game model was in very good

category are explained as follows. a) It developed

the ability of students to carry out the correct

running technique in the space provided and the

students were required to think when they were

playing. b) The students looked happy and active

when doing the Zigzag Running game. c) The game

equiped the students to have the ability to make

basic moves of short-distance and fun running

games. d) The game was oriented to the needs of the

students and it could explore the learning activities

of basic technical movements, including start, run

and finish in short distance running. e) The Zigzag

Running Game developed the ability of students to

work together and it motivated them to interact with

other students. f) The game encouraged the students

to solve problems and encouraged the students to

comply with regulations.

The Taking Wild Ball game was included in the

very good category with an average score of 113.75,

YISHPESS and CoIS 2019 - The 3rd Yogyakarta International Seminar on Health, Physical Education, and Sport Science (YISHPESS

2019) in conjunction with The 2nd Conference on Interdisciplinary Approach in Sports (CoIS 2019)

having a percentage of 94.79%. The things causing

the game model was in a very good category are

explained as follows. a) It developed the ability of

students to run and take the ball and students are

required to think when they were playing the game.

b) The students looked happy and active when

playing the game. c) The game equiped the students

to have the ability to run and take the ball while

running and it was in accordance with the

characteristics of the students. d) The Taking Wild

Ball game was oriented to the needs of the students

and it could explore activities in learning basic start

and short distance running techniques. e) Playing the

game developed the ability of the students to work

together and it motivated them to interact with other

students. f) The game encouraged the students to

solve problems and it encouraged them to comply

with regulations.

Relay Run game model for basic running

learning technique was included in the good

category with an average score of 95.75, having

percentage of 79.79%. The things causing the Relay

run game model was in the good category are

explained as follows. a) It developed the ability of

students to pass the hoops and when playing the

Relay Run, the students were required to think. b)

The students looked happy and active when doing

the Relay Run game. c) The game equiped the

students to have the ability to run and it was in

accordance with the characteristics of students. d)

The Relay run game was oriented to the needs of

learners and it could explore basic learning

activities, including start, run and finish in short

distance running. e) The game developed the ability

of students to work together and motivated them to

interact with other students. f) The game encouraged

the students to solve problems and encouraged them

to comply with regulations.

Fun Run game model was included in the very

good category with an average score of 103.50,

having percentage of 86.25%. The things causing the

Fun Run game model was in good categories are

explained as follows. a) It developed the ability of

students in running and when playing Fun Run

game, the students were required to think. b) The

Fun Run game equiped the students to have the

ability to run regularly when running and it

encouraged the students. c) The Fun Run game was

oriented to the needs of the students and it could

explore the basic learning techniques, including

start, run and finish in short distance running. d) The

game encouraged the students to solve problems and

encouraged them to comply with regulations.

Another game that was included in the good

category was Run Relay game. The Run Relay game

was in the good category because the Relay Run

game rules did not make the students move

dynamically like the the other games and only

required the students to stay in a place. The Kolangs

learning model for overall running games in the

category was very good with the average score of

108.53, having percentage of 90.44%. Thus, it can

be concluded that the Kolangs learning model for

running games in the SMPLB was feasible to be

used and it can serve as a guidance for running

learning in the SMPLB.

From the experts and the physical education

teacher as the model testers, revision processes were

carried out on the draft of the Kolangs learning

model so that finally the Kolangs learning model of

the running game in the SMPLB was produced. The

learning model is contained in a practical guidebook

for Kolangs learning model for running games and it

is suitable for use. The practical guidebook of the

Kolangs learning model for running games consists

of six games, namely: (1) Regional Marking Game,

(2) Taking Wild Balls, (3) Happy Game, (4)

Running Zigzag, (5) Relay Run, and (6) Fun Run.

In testing the effectiveness of the product, the

research subjects used was the Polokarto SMPLB

students, involving six students. This effectiveness

test was carried out four times with the pretest and

followed by posttest. The pretest and posttest results

of the product effectiveness test are shown in the

pretest and posttest tables. The assessments were

also taken, namely the assessment of cognitive,

affective and psychomotor which were incorporated

into the assessment instrument.

Result summary of the pretest and posttest t-test

analysis of the games is as follows.

Table 2: T-test results of the pre-test and post-test in

regional marking game.

Group

Pretest

Posttest

Min

Max

Mean

12.33

Std. Deviation

1.549

0.516

t-test for

Equality

of means

7.05

Sig,

0.001

Difference

4.33

35.12%

From Table 2 above, it can be seen that the

Regional Marking game has a significance value of

p of 0.001. Because of the significance value of

0.001 <0.05, this result indicates that there were

The Development of Kolangs Learning Model for Learning Running Material for Children’s with Mental Disabilities in SMPLB

significant differences. The increased percentage

value in Regional Marking game was 35.12%.

Therefore, it can be concluded that the modification

of the Regional Marking game was developed

effectively to improve running learning in mentally

retarded children in the SMPLB.

Table 3: T-test result of the pre-test and post-test in happy

game.

Group

Pretest

Posttest

Min

Max

Mean

8.5

12.67

Std. Deviation

1.643

0.816

t-test for

Equality

of means

Sig,

0.004

Difference

4,17

32,91%

From Table 3 above, it can be seen that the

Happy Game has a significance value of p of 0.004.

Because of the significance value of 0.004 <0.05,

this result shows that there were significant

differences. The increased percentage value in

Happy Game was 32.91%. Thus, it can be concluded

that the modification of the Happy Game was

developed effectively to improve running learning in

mentally retarded children in the SMPLB.

Table 4: T-test result of the pre-test and post-test in zigzag

run game.

Group

Pretest

Posttest

Min

Max

Mean

12.33

Std. Deviation

8.33

12.33

t-test for

Equality

of means

7.746

Sig,

0.001

Difference

4.33

35.12%

From Table 4 above, it can be seen that the

Zigzag Running game has a significance value of p

of 0.001. Because of the significance value of 0.001

<0.05, this result indicates that there were significant

differences. The increased percentage value in the

Running Zigzag game was 35.12%. Thus, it can be

concluded that the modification of the Zigzag

Running game that was developed was effective for

improving running learning in mentally retarded

children in the SMPLB.

Table 5: T-test result of the pre-test and post-test in taking

wild ball game.

Group

Pretest

Posttest

Min

Max

Mean

8.17

12.33

Std. Deviation

1.549

0.516

t-test for

Equality

of means

Sig,

0.004

Difference

4.16

37.78%

From Table 5 above, it can be seen that the game

of Taking Wild Ball has a significance value of p of

0.004. Because of the significance value of 0.004

<0.05, this result shows there were significant

differences. The increase percentage value in the

game was 37.78%. Hence, it can be concluded that

the modification of the Wild Ball Taking game was

developed effectively to improve running learning in

mentally retarded children in the SMPLB.

Table 6: T-test result of the pre-test and post-test in relay

run game.

Group

Pretest

Posttest

Min

Max

Mean

9.5

12.5

Std. Deviation

1.378

0.548

t-test for

Equality

of means

5.196

Sig,

0.003

Difference

4.33

26.93%

From Table 6 above, it can be seen that the Relay

Run game has a significance value of p of 0.003.

Because of the significance value of 0.003 <0.05,

this result indicates that there were significant

differences. The increased percentage value in Run

Relay game was 26.93%. Therefoe, it can be

concluded that the modified Run Relay game was

developed effectively to improve running learning in

mentally retarded children in the SMPLB.

YISHPESS and CoIS 2019 - The 3rd Yogyakarta International Seminar on Health, Physical Education, and Sport Science (YISHPESS

2019) in conjunction with The 2nd Conference on Interdisciplinary Approach in Sports (CoIS 2019)

Table 7: T-test result of the pre-test and post-test in fun

run game.

Group

Pretest

Posttest

Min

Max

Mean

12.33

Std. Deviation

1.549

0.516

t-test for

Equality

of means

5.701

Sig,

0.002

Difference

4.33

35.12%

From Table 7 above, it can be seen that the Fun

Run game has a significance value of p of 0.002.

Because the significance value was 0.002 <0.05,

then this result shows there were significant

differences. The increased percentage of Fun Run

game was 35.12%. Hence, it can be concluded that

the modification of the Fun Run game was

developed effectively to improve running learning in

mentally retarded children in the SMPLB.

Table 8: Percentage of the pre-test end post-test.

No.

Aspects

Pre-test

Post-test

Enhancement

Cognitive

64,06 %

85,94 %

21,88 %

Affective

61,98 %

90,10 %

28,13 %

Psychomotor

53,13 %

90,63 %

37,50 %

The following is a comparison histogram of the

product effectiveness test results of the Kolangs

teaching model, which comprises each domain. The

histogram can be seen in Figure1.

Figure 1: Histogram of pre-test and post-test average value

in product effectiveness test.

The percentage value obtained at pre-cycle

was 59.94% and in the first cycle the percentage

obtained was 89.45% so that there was an increase

of 29.55%. Based on this, the effectiveness of the

Kolangs learning model for running material in the

SMPLB was included in the very effective category

because the percentage value obtained as a whole

was 89.45%.

3 CONCLUSIONS

The product of Kolangs learning model for running

games was produced in the SMPLB. It is in the form

of a learning model containing learning steps of

eight games. Each game contains elements of

cognitive, affective, and psychomotor integrated in

the game with the overall criteria in learning which

was very effective to be applied to class VII students

of SMPLB. The results of this study answered the

problems in the research questions, namely: 1)

Kolangs learning model could improve the start skill

in short-distance running in the SMPLB. 2) The

Kolangs learning model could improve the short-

distance running skills in the SMPLB. 3) The

Kolangs learning model could improve the finish

skill in short distance running in the SMPLB. 4) The

Kolangs learning model enhanced the students’

cooperation which is characterized by their

cooperative attitudes with their group mates and

disciplined attitudes in running learning. 5) Kolangs

learning model increases students’ sportsmanship

which is characterized by the competitive attitudes

between groups in each game performed. 6) The

Kolangs learning model for running games was in

accordance with the developmental characteristics of

SMPLB mentally retarded students. In addition, it

was easier for the students to make the right

decisions as indicated by the types of activities that

contain elements of psychomotor, cognitive, and

affective development. 7) The Kolangs learning

model allowed the students to easily learn the basic

short-distance running techniques which were

characterized by more active and happy students. It

was because the Kolangs learning could facilitate

and explore the students’ ability to improve the basic

techniques with activities in the running games by

showing the physical activities regarding basic

techniques of running, namely start, running, and

finish.

Kolangs learning model was very effective to

improve the running skills of the SMPLB students.

The research product of this development was the

Kolangs learning model which was packaged in

DVD and practical guidebook for Kolangs learning

models for running games entitled "Kolangs

Learning: A Learning Model for Learning Materials

Running Mentally Retarded Children in the

SMPLB." six games, namely: (1) Regional Marking

Game, (2) Happy Game, (3) Zigzag Running Game,

(4) Wild Ball Taking Game, (5) Relay Run Game,

and (6) Fun Run Game.

The Development of Kolangs Learning Model for Learning Running Material for Children’s with Mental Disabilities in SMPLB

REFERENCES

Agustiani, H., 2006. Psikologi perkembangan:

Pendekatan ekologi kaitannya dengan konsep diri dan

penyesuain diri pada remaja, PT Refika Aditama.

Bandung.

Bloom, B. S., etc., 1956. Taxonomy of educational

objectives: the classification of educational goals,

handbook cognitive domain, Longmans, Green and

Co. New York.

Dimyati, 2009. Belajar dan pembelajaran, Rineka Cipta.

Jakarta.

Dwiyogo, W. D., 2004. Konsep penelitian dan

pengembangan, Lemlit UM. Malang.

Febrianta, Y., & Sukoco, P., 2013. Upaya peningkatan

pembelajaran permainan bolabasket melalui metode

pendekatan taktik siswa SMPN 2 Pandak Bantul.

Jurnal Keolahragaan, 2, 186-196. Diakses tanggal 15

Desember 2015 dari

http://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/jolahraga/article/vie

w/2574

Hamalik, O., 2008. Kurikulum dan pembelajaran, Bumi

Aksara. Jakarta.

Hergenhahn, B. R., & Olson, M. H., 2008. Theories of

learning (teori belajar). Terjemahan Tri Wibowo B.S.

Vol 7. Jakarta: Kencana.

Rosdiani. D.,2012. Perencanaan pembelajaran dalam

pendidikan jasmani dan kesehatan, Alfabeta.

Bandung.

Rumini, S., dkk., 1995. Psikologi pendidikan. FIP UNY.

Yogyakarta.

Sugiyono, 2008. Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif

dan R & D, Alfabeta. Bandung.

Sukmadinata, N. S., 2010 . Metode penelitian pendidikan,

Remaja Rosdakarya. Bandung.

Sumiyarsono, D., 2002. Ketrampilan bola basket, FIK

UNY. Yogyakarta.

YISHPESS and CoIS 2019 - The 3rd Yogyakarta International Seminar on Health, Physical Education, and Sport Science (YISHPESS

2019) in conjunction with The 2nd Conference on Interdisciplinary Approach in Sports (CoIS 2019)