Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology

ISSN No:-2456-2165

The Influence of Mind Mapping Learning

Method on Student Learning Results
Siti Suharni Simamora1, RismaDelima Harahap*, Irma Yanti3,
Mila Nirmala Sari Hasibuan4, Suaida Pratika5, dan Arman Harahap6
Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Labuhanbatu University
Province Sumatera Utara Indonesia

Abstract:- This study aims to determine the effect of because of the low quality of education. This is a challenge
Mind Mapping Learning Methods on student learning for teachers in shaping students to have quality resources
outcomes. The research instruments used were pretest (Dansa, 2007).
and posttest in the form of multiple choices of 20 items.
The population in this study were all students of class Teachers and students are the main components in the
XI IPA 1 and XI IPA 2 in the even semester of SMA learning process. Teachers must be able to guide students in
Negeri 2 Kotapinang, and the samples in this study were such a way that they can develop their knowledge in
all 60 students. The data collection technique was accordance with the knowledge structure of the subject of
carried out by means of tests. Before the research the study. Teachers in addition must understand the material
questions were first validated including content validity, being taught are also required to know the exact way in
different power, difficulty index and reliability. Based which the level of student knowledge at the beginning or
on the average post-test scores in the experimental class before participating in the learning process. Furthermore,
75.50 with the largest value of 95 the smallest value of the teacher looks for learning methods that are suitable with
60 while in the control class the average value of 64.33 the learning material (Djamarah, 2010).
with the largest value of 75 the smallest value of 50,
based on the calculation of learning outcomes Based on this description, it is necessary to have a
improvement of the experimental class 50% and the study that aims to improve student learning outcomes and
control class 30% From these results it can be support the way students in completing the learning process
concluded that Ha is accepted by tcount>ttable = towards a better future, that is, with the Mind Mapping
337,158> 1,671 in other words there is the effect of mind learning method. Mind Mapping learning method is one of
mapping learning methods on student learning the graphical based learning methods (Zeilikik, 1998).
outcomes. Data obtained from the results of the test are
then analyzed using the t test with different samples. Based on the results of visits and interviews with
Before the t test is carried out, the requirements test teachers who teach biology at Kotapinang State High
which includes normality and homogeneity tests is School that 60% of students scored <70, with a minimum
carried out. The results showed that there were effects completeness criterion (KKM) of 75, the teacher concerned
of Mind Mapping Learning Methods on Student rarely used varied learning methods or models, but only
Learning Outcomes. guided by the handbook teachers and lecturing without
utilizing the facilities and infrastructure available at school.
Keywords:- Mind Mapping Learning Method, Biology When teaching and learning activities take place, many
Learning Outcomes. students look bored and bored. Likewise, the sitting
position of the students also becomes one of the problems
I. INTRODUCTION that arise during the learning process, because some
students have limited vision so that it is less optimal in
Teaching and learning process is essentially a understanding the lesson, resulting in low student learning
communication process, namely the process of delivering outcomes in SMA Negeri 2 Kotapinang especially in class
messages from the message source through the message XI Science. Hopefully this research can improve student
channel in the form of teaching content and education in learning outcomes. Considering the difficulty and lack of
the curriculum is poured by the teacher or other sources utilization of learning facilities and infrastructure by
into communication symbols. In an effort to prepare a teachers as well as low student learning outcomes, so
generation that is ready to face the challenges of the times, researchers are interested in conducting research on: "The
that is why humans are needed to have quality human Effect of Mind Mapping Learning Methods on Student
resources, but in the world of education in Indonesia, Learning Outcomes in Class XI IPA of SMA Negeri 2
especially in school education today is still very alarming Kotapinang.

IJISRT20MAR382 www.ijisrt.com 801

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
II. METHOD  Test Reliability Test
The reliability of the test can be calculated with the
The research method used is Quasi Experiment. The help of Ms-Excel which is determined at the level of trust
learning method is a planned and systematic way of (α = 0.05). r arithmetic> r table then the problem is
working that is used by a teacher in the implementation of declared reliable.
learning activities to facilitate the implementation of a
learning activity and to achieve a learning goal in  Level of Problem Difficulties
accordance with what has been determined (MONE 2003). Obtained the results of the level of difficulty of the
This research was conducted to find out the effect of mind questions that have been tested are 11 questions in the easy
mapping learning methods on student learning outcomes. category while 19 questions in the medium category,
Sampling was determined in total (total sampling) with a
total of 60 students.  Difference Power of Problems
Based on the analysis of the item, the matter of
Data collection techniques by conducting tests with distinguishing matter is obtained 14 questions in the ugly
pretest and posttest. With multiple choice questions as category, 11 questions in the sufficient category and 5
many as 25 validated questions, then conducted research questions in the good category.
instrument techniques including Test Validity Test aims to
interpret the significance of the price validity of each  Student Learning Outcomes Data
question then the price is consulted to the product price Pretest Data
criticism r table with criteria price r count> r table for the α Before the two samples are given a different treatment
= level 0.05 then the correlation is said to be valid. first given a pre-test (pretest) to determine the initial
(Arikunto, 2009) abilities of each student in the experimental class and the
control class. From the research, it was obtained the results
Then performed the Test Reliability Test, Difficulty of the pretest taught by the Mind mapping learning method
Level, Different power tests after that Data Analysis with the number of 30 students obtained the highest value
Techniques include the Normality Test where the square in the experimental class 75 in the control class 70.
count or X2 count has been obtained from the results of
subsequent calculations compared to the square squared  Student Learning Outcomes in the Experiment Class
table or X2 table with degrees of freedom dk = n-2 and and Control Class.
significance level α = 0 .5. Data can be said to be normal if From the research, the results of the posttest with the
the square of black flower or X2 count <chi square table or number of 30 students obtained the highest value in the
X2 table. (Arikunto, 1996). Homogeneity test where the experimental class 95 in the control class 75 and the lowest
results obtained from the Fcount are then compared to the experimental class 60 in the control class 50. The average
Ftable which has a numerator dk equal to (n-1) and value (mean) 75.50 in the experimental class and 64.50 in
denominator dk (n-1) and a significance level of α = 0.05. It the control class. The variance value is 154.05 in the
said the experimental group and the control group came experimental class and 135.09 in the control class. While
from populations that had relatively similar variances if the standard deviation (SD) in the experimental class was
Fcount<Ftable. (Arikunto, 1996), 11.62 and the control class was 12.41 with a total of 30
Then the hypothesis test (t-test) is used to test the student subjects.
regression coefficient partially to find out whether the
independent variable influences the dependent variable.  Normality test
Testing criteria: Ho is accepted if the price of tcount<ttable The criteria for testing a sample are normally
and Ha is rejected, Ha is accepted if the price of distributed if the Chi Square value is calculated <Chi
tcount>ttable and Ho is rejected. square table price at the significant level α = 0.05. From the
calculation results it is stated that both samples are
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION normally distributed. Normality test data of the
experimental class pre-test (which was learned using the
 Test Validity Test mind mapping learning method) obtained Chi Square test
Number of students (n) = 30 people. If it is <the Chi square table price (10085.22 <11.07), and the pre-
determined using a level of confidence α = 0.05, rtable = test data in the control class (which was learned using
0.361 is obtained. Keriteria validity assessment used is if r learning conventional ¬) Square calculation <Chi square
count>rtable on the product moment then said the problem price (6854,957<11.07), and experimental class post test
is valid. Of the 30 test instruments tested were obtained 20 data (which is taught using the Mind mapping method)
valid questions, while invalid there were 10 questions. Calculate square <Chi square price (11024.42 <11.07). And
Then 20 valid questions were used as research instruments post test data in the control class (which is learned by using
for taking data on student learning outcomes in the material conventional learning) Square squares <Chi square values
reproductive system in humans. (10,085,11.02, 6,855, 10,831 <11,07) at the real level α =
0.05. Thus it can be concluded that the distribution of data
there is a difference between the effect of student learning
outcomes that are learned using the Mind mapping method

IJISRT20MAR382 www.ijisrt.com 802

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
and student learning outcomes that are learned using This, the results of the study indicate that there is an
conventional learning with normal distribution. influence on student learning outcomes that are learned by
using the mapping learning method. Based on the theories
 Homogenesis Test above, it shows that students' understanding and learning
Homogenesis testing is intended to determine whether outcomes that are learned using mind mapping learning
the two groups of students used as research samples have methods are more influential compared to students who are
homogeneous data variance or can represent other taught using conventional learning methods.
populations. Homogeneity testing is done by the F test in
both groups of samples. Based on the results of calculations REFERENCES
in appendix 16, it is concluded that both research samples
come from populations that homogeneous with Fcount<F [1]. Arikunto, Suharsimi. (2010). Research Management,
table. With the homogeneity test calculation results of the Jakarta: RinekaCipta.
experimental group pretest and control class pretest data [2]. A Harahap, 2015. Perbedaan Hasil Belajar Siswa yang
that is 1.19 <1.85, the results of the calculation of the diajarkan Dengan Menggunakan Metode Diskusi
experimental class posttest and the control class posttest are Dengan Penerapan Prediction Guide (Tebak
1.14 <1.85 at the α = 0.05 level. Thus the sample used in Pelajaran) dan Tanpa Penerapan Prediction Guide
this study was stated to represent other populations. Pada Materi. Jurnal Pembelajaran dan Biologi
Nukleus 1 (1), 25-28
 Hypothesis testing
Hypothesis testing is done using t test. From the [3]. rsyad. 2008. Learning Media. Jakarta: Raja
calculations obtained tcount> t table is 337,158> 1.67155 GrafindoPersada.
then Ha is accepted or there is an influence on the [4]. Broggy, J., & McClelland, G. 2008. Undrgraduate
improvement of student learning outcomes that are taught Students' Attitudes Towards Physics After A Concept
using Mind Mapping learning methods in class XI IPA Mapping Experience.Proc.Of the Third Int.
SMANegeri 2 Kotapinang. Conference on Concept Mapping. A. J. Canas, P.
Rieska, M. Ahlberg& J. D. Novac Estonia & Helsinki,
IV. DISCUSSION Finland: Eds. Tallin
[5]. Buzan, Tony. 2012. Smart Book Mind Map. Jakarta:
Based on the results of the study, it was found that PT GramediaPustakaUtama.
there was an influence of the MindMapping Learning [6]. Corebima, A. D. 2007. Review On: Learning
Method on Biology Learning Outcomes of Class XI Strategies Having Bigger Potency To Empower
Natural Sciences Students in SMA Negeri 2 Kotapinang, Thinking Skills And Concepts Gaining Of Lower
namely the value of the experimental class students Academic Students. Malang: Malang
obtained an average of 50.83 pre-test with a fairly good StatebUniversity.
category, from 30 students there were 30 % or 9 students [7]. Dahar&Hariyanto. (2005). Learning and Learning.
who completed KKM and post-test were 75.50 with a good Bandung: PT Youth
category, where there were 50% of students who completed Ministry of National Education, 2003. Development of
KKM students from 30 students. While the control class Effective Learning Methods. Jakarta: Ministry of
students obtained an average pre-test score of 43.83 with a National Education
less good category and a post-test of 64.33 with a fairly [8]. DePorter, Bobbi.,& Mike Hernacki. 2008. Quantum
good category. another case with students who are taught Learning: Familiarizing Learning Comfortable and
using conventional learning methods many students who Enjoyable.Bandung: Kaifa
look bored, inactive, and not enthusiastic in learning [9]. Dimyanti and Mudjino. 2002. Learning and Learning.
because they only focus on textbooks and lectures. Jakarta: RinekaCipta.
[10]. Djamarah, 2010.Learning Psychology.
This is consistent with the opinion of Novac and Jakarta:RinekaCipta
Canas (2007) that mind mapping is a way to present [11]. Djamarah, SyaifulBahri and Aswan Zain.2006.
children's conceptual understanding and observe changes in Teaching and Learning Strategies. Jakarta:
concepts that shape children's understanding and to present RinekaCipta.
a framework for forming relationships between concepts [12]. Hamalik, Oemar. 2006. Teaching and Learning
(Broggy and McClelland, 2008). Process. Jakarta: PT BumiAksara.
[13]. Heriadi, S., (2012), The Effect of Mind Mapping in
This is in line with Mulyatiningsih (2014). Mind Inquiry Learning Models on Metacognitive Skills and
mapping will use both sides of the brain, namely the left Biology Learning Outcomes in Class X Students of
brain and right brain because the mind map uses images, SMAN 1 Singosari-Malang East Java, Journal, FKIP
colors, and imagination (right brain) by using words, UNS, Banjarmasin.
numbers, and logic (left brain) which then in the [14]. Huda, Miftahul. 2016. Methods of Teaching and
application is very helpful for quickly understanding the Learning. Yogyakarta: Student Library Rineka Cipta.
problem because it has been mapped.

IJISRT20MAR382 www.ijisrt.com 803