EFFECTIVENESS OF GSECE LEARNING MODEL (GUIDING, SEARCHING, EXPERIENCING, COMMUNICATING, EVALUATING) FOR PHYSICS LEARNING AT VOCATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL.

Andik Kurniawan 1 , Indrawati 1 , Sudarti 1 , Sutarto 1 , I Ketut Mahardika 1 , and Iis Nur Asyiah 1 . Department of Post Graduate Science Education, Jember University, East Java, Indonesia. ...................................................................................................................... Manuscript Info Abstract ......................... ........................................................................ Manuscript History


ISSN: 2320-5407
Int. J. Adv. Res. 6(1), 1534-1538 1535 As a solution to the above problems, a workable solution is to improve the learning process. There is also one of the learning models that can be proposed is the GSECE learning model. This learning model takes shelter under constructivism learning which emphasizes that knowledge built into the mind of learners and this learning model emphasizes the meaningfulness of learning. Constructivist learning is based on the fact that skills and knowledge gained are not passively accepted and memorized but involve the active participation of learners through thought and immediate activity so that knowledge will be developed [2]. A truly contextual learning will occur when students (learners) are able to process new information or knowledge in such a way as the student's mind of reference (memory, experience, and response) [3]. In addition learning in contextual learning tends to look for meaning, search for sensible relationships, as well as search for usefulness between material concepts learned with real-world life situations.
One of the learning models that can be proposed is GSECE learning model has 5 important stages. Guiding first stage is the teacher gives instructions and directs students to determine the material or topics in accordance with the material to be studied. It aims to enable students to gain a higher understanding. According to Ulya states that with teachers give guidance to students in the learning process, it can bring students to a higher understanding [4]. This is in line with Vygotsky opinion which says that an actual child's developmental level with a higher level of potential development can be achieved by a child if received counsel or assistance from someone more mature or more competent [5]. Another opinion was also delivered by Nwagbo which states with the teacher provides guidance in the form of illustrations for students until students are able to generalize and conclude will make students able to apply the learning materials widely [6].
The second stage, Searching is the teacher gives the task of looking for information relating to the material or topics that can be obtained from reading and or images and video. It aims to provide opportunities for students to explore ideas independently and simultaneously optimize the potential of students to be able to master physics concepts well. According to Bruner learning activities will work well and creatively if the students find their own conclusions about the topics studied so that the concept can be understood more deeply and more lasting in the memory of students [5], [7]- [12]. Further Bajongga says that learning that optimizes the potential in students will foster creativity and students will be able to find and develop their own facts and concepts and problem solving [13].
The third stage of experiencing the teacher provides an opportunity for students to find the phenomenon or information related to the topic of everyday phenomena experienced by students. Learning that connects or links material or learning topics with the knowledge they have will make learning more meaningful [5], [14], [15]. This is supported by the opinion of Khaerul which states that learning that exposes students to problems in everyday life can be more meaningful and meaningful for students [16].
The fourth stage of communicating is the teacher giving the opportunity to students to communicate to peers about the material or topic of the search results and the results of the study based on the experience of students in everyday life. It aims to train students to communicate as well as to see the extent to which students master the material in learning activities. According to Piaget the process of exchange of ideas through communication and interaction with peers and adults plays an important role in the intellectual development of children and the formation of knowledge in children [5]. In addition, the communication will show the ability of students in understanding the material and with communication will also occur interaction and discussion with the group that makes students active in learning [17].
The fifth stage evaluating the teacher evaluates the student's learning outcomes after following the learning. It aims to obtain information and data that can be used as a basis to determine the level of progress, development, and achievement of student learning, and the effectiveness of teacher teaching. To obtain information and data of an accurate learning activities about the level of achievement of learning objectives by students it is necessary to evaluate learning activities that can be a test [18].
In relation to the issues discussed and proposed solutions on the advantages of the learning model, an experimental study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of the learning outcomes of the control class using conventional learning and experimental class using the GSECE learning model. In addition, to see student responses and activities of control classes using conventional learning and experimental classes using the GSECE learning model.

Methodology:-
This study is a quasi experiment with the consideration that not all variables can be strictly controlled. The research design used was pre -post test control group design. The design of this study can be seen in The population in this study were the students of class X TKJ in SMK Negeri 7 Jember in the academic year 2017/2018. Before determining the control class and experimental class, Leven's test was tested from the daily physics value data on the previous material. This is to see the homogeneity of all sample candidates. After the test Leven's test obtained sample class X TKJ 1 with the number of students 35 people as a control group and class X TKJ 2 with the number of students 35 people as an experimental group. The dependent variable in this study consists of learning outcomes, student responses and student learning activities. The independent variables consist of the GSECE learning model for the experimental group and the conventional learning model for the control group. Data collected in this study include learning outcomes measured by using tests, student responses measured by questionnaire and student activity measured by observation sheet.
Data were analyzed with independent sample t-test to determine the main difference of independent variable (learning model) to dependent variable (learning result). Descriptive analysis techniques used to describe student responses and student learning activities.

Result:-
The result of the research described is the learning achievement achieved by the students between the groups after following the learning model of GSECE (experimental group) and conventional model (control group). The results are presented in Table 2 Table 2:-Results of post test analysis with independent sample t-test Table 2 shows that the mean post-test scores of the experimental group students were 78.29 (SD = 6.34), and for the control group students were 71.14 (SD = 6.23). It shows that the learning outcomes of students who follow the learning with the GSECE model is higher than students who follow the learning with conventional teaching methods. Based on Table 2, t obtained = 4.75 indicates that the value of t count > t table (4.75> 1.99) and P value (0,000 <0.05) then Ho is rejected, meaning that there is a difference between the average value experimental group exams with an average of control group exam.
Student responses in the experimental group using the GSECE learning model with the control group using the conventional learning model are presented in Table 3.
Student Reponse GSECE learning model Conventional learning model Percentage average 78,46 60,45 Category good good enought Table 3:-Description of student response value Based on Table 3 can be described that the response of students in the experimental group learning using GSECE learning model obtained the average value of 78.46 percentage including good category while the student response in the control group using the conventional learning model obtained the average value of percentage of 60, 45 including the category is quite good. From the above data, it can be described that the student response using GSECE learning model is better than conventional learning model.

1537
Student activity in the experimental group using the GSECE learning model with the control group using the conventional learning model is presented in Table 4 Table 4 it can be explained that the student activity in the experimental group using the GSECE learning model obtained the average value of the percentage of 69.86 including the active category. Student activity is control group which use conventional learning model obtained by average value percentage equal to 62,92 including active category. From the above data, it can be described that in the experimental group using the GSECE learning model the students are better than the control group using the conventional learning model.

Discussion:-
This study aims to determine the effectiveness of GSECE learning model with learning outcomes, student responses and student learning activities. From the results of this study indicate that there is a significant difference in the average of student learning outcomes of students who learn to use the GSECE model is 78.29 with the group of students who learn to use conventional learning model that is 71.14.
The results of the overall hypothesis testing previously described show that the GSECE learning model through five important stages of learning has proven superior effectiveness toward learning outcomes, student responses and student activities compared with conventional learning models.
The main factor that makes the GSECE learning model more superior lies in its syntax which emphasizes students using all their potential to seek, and find their own concepts and then connect with experience in everyday life. The learning model with students looking for, finding and connecting experiences in daily life can be more meaningful learning [19] and can sharpen intelligence and enable students to respond effectively to learning materials [20]. Another relevant study conducted by Mulyasa states that the reasoning that optimizes the potential of students seeking, finding and experiencing directly proven to increase student motivation in learning so that students become more active in teaching and learning activities [21].

Conclusion:-
Based on the research results can be concluded several things as follows. First, the results of physics learning between the groups of students who were given learning with the GSECE model better than the group of students who were given a conventional learning model. Both student responses in the group of students who were given learning with the GSECE model were better than the group of students who were given the lessons with the conventional model. The three activities of the students in the group of students who were given learning with the GSECE model were better than the group of students who were given the conventional learning model.