New THE EFFECT OF VALUE CLARIFICATION LEARNING … · 2018. 11. 30. · Lisievici and Andronie (2016) conclude that students more appreciate VCT than traditional strategies. The superiority

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 1072 [email protected]

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)

Volume 9, Issue 11, November 2018, pp. 1072–1083, Article ID: IJCIET_09_11_102

Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijciet/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=9&IType=11

ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316

©IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

THE EFFECT OF VALUE CLARIFICATION

LEARNING STRATEGIES AND SOCIAL

INQUIRY ON CONCEPT COMPREHENSION

AND STUDENT TOLERANCE ATTITUDES

WITH DIFFERENT COGNITIVE STYLE

Shofiyatul Azmi

Wisnuwardhana University of Malang

I Nyoman Sudana Degeng

State University of Malang

Waras Kamdi


Punaji Setyosari


Suko Wiyono


ABSTRACT

This study aim were to examine the understanding differences of classes concept of

value clarification learning strategies and social inquiry; to examine the

comprehension differences between students with different cognitive styles; to examine

the interaction between learning strategies and cognitive styles to understand the

concepts; to examine the student tolerance attitudes differences who taught with value

clarification learning and social inquiry strategies; to examine the students tolerance

differences with different cognitive styles; and to examine the interaction between

learning strategies and cognitive styles to foster the student tolerance. This study uses

an experimental quasi design. Data was collected with three instruments, namely:

cognitive style test, concept comprehension test, and tolerance attitude test. Subjects

were 146 students of Indonesian Language Department, Teacher Training Faculty in

Education, Wisnuwardhana University Malang. The analysis technique was MANOVA

with 2x2. The study results showed that learning strategy affects on the concepts

comprehension, social inquiry class has a higher concept comprehension than the

values clarification. Different cognitive styles have no effect on concept

comprehension. There was no interaction between learning strategies and cognitive

The Effect of Value Clarification Learning Strategies and Social Inquiry on Concept

Comprehension and Student Tolerance Attitudes with Different Cognitive Style


styles in concept comprehension. There were tolerance differences between classes

with value clarification learning and social inquiry, value clarification class has

higher value of tolerance than social inquiry class. Cognitive style does not affect on

tolerance. There was an interaction between learning strategies and cognitive styles to

foster student tolerance. Social inquiry strategies were appropriate for concept

comprehension learning. The value clarification strategies were appropriate for

learning to improver attitude, character and moral of students.

Key words: value clarification, social inquiry, concept comprehension, tolerance,

citizenship education, cognitive style

Cite this Article: Shofiyatul Azmi, I Nyoman Sudana Degeng, Waras Kamdi, Punaji

Setyosari, Suko Wiyono, The Effect of Value Clarification Learning Strategies and

Social Inquiry on Concept Comprehension and Student Tolerance Attitudes with

Different Cognitive Style, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology

(IJCIET) 9(11), 2018, pp. 1072–1083.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=9&IType=11

1. INTRODUCTION

A peace world is the dream of every human being. Indonesia nation also has hopes for citizen

peace and harmony to implement development and goal achievement. The Indonesian nation

is a pluralistic nation with various religions, tribes, languages, cultures, and customs.

Pluralism implies a difference. Such diversity will produce positive power for nation building

if managed properly. Conversely, the mismanagement will lead to conflict to threaten the

nation integrity. In general, one causes of Indonesia conflict is the intolerance attitude.

Intolerance is an attitude with low respect to difference (tolerance). Intolerance produces

violence between one group and another. Violence continues to occur because of low

understanding of values concept and tolerance to differences. Low understanding on tolerance

concepts and attitudes were caused by terrorism with bombing action, religious conflicts in

Maluku, Poso, Ambon, sambas, Sampet, Papua riots and quarrels between residents, youth

and students from different ethnicities, and violence and public driver demonstrations against

online transportation, and other social conflicts.

These social conflict become obstacle to achieve national goals and disruption for national

security. Social conflict must be eliminated with all efforts, one of them was to understand the

value concept and to foster tolerance of citizens. One effort to concept comprehension and to

foster tolerance is education, especially in Civics Education (PKn).

The responsibility of educational institutions to implement Civics learning is to create

citizens with citizenship knowledge, attitudes, and skills to realize smart and good citizenship.

The public expects the state represented by educational institutions can contribute to value

education. Nucci and Narvaez (2008) argued that public expectations to schools become

places where children get value formation such as honesty (97%), respect for others (94%),

democracy (93%), respect for various races and background (93%).

The choice of Civics learning strategies with aim of concept comprehension and fostering

tolerance should be considered seriously to get efficient and effective way to provide

knowledge about state life, internalize the national values and morals. Many education

strategies have been developed in Civics learning as the Values Clarification Technique

(VCT) and social inquiry.

The effectiveness of VCT learning strategies has been proven by Oliha Josephine and

Vivian (2015) about the effectiveness of value clarification to reduce the drop out behavior of

Shofiyatul Azmi, I Nyoman Sudana Degeng, Waras Kamdi, Punaji Setyosari, Suko Wiyono


young people in Nigeria. Sudrajat (2011) concluded that a value clarification strategy can

improve morality for students. Fahyuni and Bandono (2017) concluded that 94% of students

gave a positive response to the use of value clarification strategies with image media.

Lisievici and Andronie (2016) conclude that students more appreciate VCT than traditional

strategies.

The superiority of social inquiry strategy was expressed by Wong (2009) in a civic

education project to link the globalization, imperialism and role of government organizations

with their problems by applying the jurisprudential and social inquiry strategies. Raharjo et al.

(2015) concluded that "the social inquiry strategy is very appropriate and effective to improve

reasoning skills, logical thinking, creative students, developing values of honesty, openness,

tolerance, cooperation ...". Civics learning with both strategies has several equivalencies,

including: student-centered; the learning activities emphasize on the process of thinking

critically and analytically; the process is carried out through question and answer; material

content raises actual social issues; and interaction in active discussion from all participants.

VCT and social inquiry strategies apply democratic learning, so that both were used as

learning strategies for knowledge (cognitive) as well as attitudes (affective).

In addition to learning strategies, learning outcomes were also determined by students

condition, one of them was cognitive style. Cognitive style describes the people relative habit

in accepting, thinking, solving problems and storing information. There were two cognitive

styles, namely the field dependence (FD) and field independence (FI).

The previous studies seldom compare VCT learning strategies and social inquiry

strategies. They compare VCT with conventional learning and comparing VCT by playing

role from Rai Roli (2014). Previous studies have only examined the effect of learning

strategies implementation, not students' cognitive styles, whereas learning outcomes were not

only determined by learning strategies. Research to examine the interaction of learning

strategies with cognitive style to understand the concepts and tolerance attitudes was rare.

Preliminary observations showed that Civics lecturers still used conventional strategies by

explaining the material, students were less active, just listening and recording. Some Civics

studies have also applied discussion methods, but were monotonous in class discussions, so it

needs more interesting and challenging in Civics learning innovations. Suwarma (2000) said

that the weakness of Civics learning was not optimal learning process and trapped in

memorization process which only touches low level of cognitive development, has not

developed high-level thinking skills.

The weakness of Civics learning is reinforced by opinions of Wahab (2008) and

Winataputra (2008) who suggested the weaknesses of Civics learning, namely the low student

initiative, lack of student independence in learning, lack of joyful learning, and still

"textbookish". The instructors were not ready to teach contextually to get optimal process of

values internalizing of Pancasila as the nation basis and view of nation's life. This results in

less interesting Civics learning so that it is not optimal in achieving learning objectives. Based

on above description, this research needs to be done to get an empirical foundation to provide

certainty about the effect of value clarification learning strategies and social inquiry on

concept comprehension and tolerance attitudes of students who have different cognitive styles

in Civics Education Course.




2. RESEARCH METHODS

2.1. Design

The study used an experimental quasi design, 2 X 2 factorial designs, involving two groups,

each group with specific treatment. The first group or experimental class uses value

clarification learning strategies (VCT), while the second group uses social inquiry learning

strategies. The dependent variable is learning outcomes in form of concept comprehensions

and students tolerance attitudes. While the moderator variable is cognitive style.

2.2. Research Subject

The study subjects were students from study program of Language Education and Indonesian

Letters of Teacher Training and Education Faculty (FKIP) of Wisnuwardhana University

Malang (Unidha). Subjects were selected by cluster random sampling. Two classes totaling 76

students, namely offering A and B, used VCT learning, while C and D class totaling 73

students used social inquiry learning, the total were 149 students.

2.3. Instrument

There were three instruments used in this study, namely: cognitive style tests, concept

comprehension tests, and tolerance attitude tests.

2.4. Research Procedure

This research was conducted in even semester academic year 2016/2017, consisting of 2

stages: the experimental preparation and experimental stage. The experimental preparation

phase included preliminary study activities on Civics curriculum, syllabus preparation,

materials preparation, and arranging instruments, as well as testing the validity and reliability

of instruments. The second stage is an experiment, consisting of two activities: pre-

experiment and experiment. Pre-experiment by pretest, consist of cognitive style tests,

concept comprehension tests and tolerance attitudes before treatment. The experimental

activities of classroom learning were taught with VCT and social inquiry for 6 times meeting.

The 7th week was posttest on concept comprehensions and attitudes of students' tolerance.

After the experiment, next step was data analysis, and research report preparation.

2.5. Data Analysis

Data analysis technique was two-way Manova with SPSS + 20 for windows software.

3. RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1. Description the Posttest Mean of Concepts Comprehension Ability of

Learning Strategies and Cognitive Styles

Analysis of concept comprehension ability between groups learning strategies (VCT and

social inquiry) and students' cognitive styles of field dependence (FD) and field independence

(FI) was shown in table 1.



Table 1 Mean of concept comprehension for learning strategies and cognitive styles

Learning

Strategies Cognitive Styles

Concept comprehension

Mean Std. Deviation N

VCT

FD 6.68 1.67 37

FI 6.92 1.46 39

Total 6.80 1.56 76

Social Inquiry

FD 7.91 1.23 33

FI 7.90 1.35 40

Total 7.90 1.29 73

Total

FD 7.26 1.59 70

FI 7.42 1.48 79

Total 7.34 1.53 149

Table 1 shows that the mean of concept comprehension of VCT classes was lower than

social inquiry learning group (mean VCT strategy of 6.80 <mean of social inquiry strategies

of 7.90). The mean of concept comprehension for students with FD style is lower than FI

(mean of cognitive style FD of 7.26 < mean of cognitive style FI of 7.42). The mean concept

comprehension of VCT strategy class and cognitive style of FD was lower than the mean of

concept comprehension of VCT strategy and FI cognitive style (mean of VCT-FD of 6.68 <

mean of VCT-FI of 6.92). Concept comprehension of social inquiry strategies class and

cognitive style of FD was greater than the mean of concept comprehension of social inquiry

strategy class and FI cognitive style but the difference is only 0.01 (mean of inquiry-FD of

7.91 > mean inquiry-FI of 7.90)

3.2. Description the Mean Posttest of Tolerance Attitudes from Learning

Strategies and Cognitive Styles

Table 2 show the analysis results of a general picture of tolerance between learning strategies

(VCT and social inquiry) and students' cognitive styles (FD and FI).

Table 2 Mean of tolerance attitude for learning strategies and cognitive styles

Learning

Strategies Cognitive Style

Concept comprehension

Mean Std. Deviation N

VCT

FD 70.08 5.91 37

FI 71.00 5.89 39

Total 70.55 5.880 76

Social Inquiry

FD 71.97 4.02 33

FI 66.33 7.54 40

Total 68.88 6.78 73

Total

FD 70.97 5.16 70

FI 68.63 7.13 79

Total 69.73 6.37 149

Table 2 shows that the mean of students tolerance attitude in VCT strategy classes were

higher than social inquiry strategy classes (mean of VCT strategy of 70.55 > mean social

inquiry strategy of 68.88). The mean of students tolerance attitudes with a FD cognitive style

were higher than FI cognitive style (mean of FD cognitive style of 70.97 > mean of FI

cognitive style of 68.63). The mean of students tolerance attitude in VCT strategies classes

and FD cognitive style were lower than VCT cognitive style in FI class (mean of VCT-FD of

70.08 < mean VCT-FI of 71.00). Students' tolerance of social inquiry strategy classes and FD

cognitive style was greater than the mean tolerance attitude of students in social inquiry

strategy class and FI cognitive style (mean of social inquiry -FD of 71.97 > mean of social

inquiry -FI of 66.33).




3.3. Test Results the Interaction between Learning Strategies and Cognitive

Styles

Table 3 shows analysis results the differences between groups simultaneously and the main

effects (see the significance of each factor on dependent variable). Hypotheses testing were

determined at significance level <0.05.

Table 3 Output of Main Effect

Source Dependent Variable

Type III

Sum of

Squares

df Mean

Square F Sig.

Corrected

Model

Concept_Understandin

g 46.339

a 3 15.446 7.436 .000

Tolerance_Attitude 465.918b 3 155.306 7.542 .000

Intercept


g 8009.749 1 8009.749 3855.896 .000

Tolerance_Attitude 728038.736 1 728038.736 35355.409 .000

Learning_Strat

egies


g 45.249 1 45.249 21.783 .000


Cognitive_Styl

e


g .526 1 .526 .253 .616

Tolerance_Attitude 2.850 1 2.850 .138 .710

Learning_Strat

egies *

Cognitive_Styl

e


g .609 1 .609 .293 .589


Error


g 301.205 145 2.077

Tolerance_Attitude 2985.841 145 20.592

Total


g 8380.000 149

Tolerance_Attitude 734392.000 149

Corrected Total


g 347.544 148

Tolerance_Attitude 3451.758 148

a. R Squared = .133(Adjusted R Squared = .115)

b. R Squared = .135 (Adjusted R Squared = .117)

Table 3 shows the concept comprehension of VCT strategy class and social inquiry has F

= 21.783 and significance of 0.000 < 0.05. It means there were significant differences of

concept comprehension between students in VCT and social inquiry classes. Table 1 show the

mean posttest of VCT is 6.80 while the social inquiry class is 7.90. The value of social inquiry

class was higher than VCT class. The concept comprehension between students who have

different cognitive styles has significance value of 0.253 > 0.05, it means there was no

significant difference of concept comprehension for students who have FD and FI cognitive

style. Table 1 the shows mean score of posttest concept comprehension of students with FD

cognitive style = 7.26, while students with FI cognitive style = 7.42. The mean posttest score

of students who have a FD cognitive style was lower than FI cognitive style, but the

difference is very small, only 0.16. This small difference is not strong enough to show

cognitive style differences for concept comprehension. The findings show that interaction



between learning strategies and cognitive styles to concept comprehension has F values of

0.293 and significance of 0.589 > 0.05. It means that there was no interaction between

learning strategies and cognitive styles.

Table 3 shows the tolerance attitude of students with VCT strategies and social inquiry

obtained F of 18.240 and significance value 0.000 <0.05. It means there was a significant

difference in student tolerance attitudes for VCT strategies and social inquiry classes. Table 2

shows the mean posttest score from tolerance attitude of VCT strategy class is 70.55, while

the social inquiry class is 68.88. The tolerance attitude of students with VCT strategies is

higher than social inquiry. While the tolerance attitudes of students with different cognitive

styles has F value of 0.138 and significance 0.710 > 0.05. It means there was no significant

difference in tolerance attitude of students with FD and FI cognitive style. The analysis shows

that interaction between learning strategies and cognitive styles in development of student

tolerance attitudes has F value of 5.177 and significance 0.024 <0.05. It means there was an

interaction between learning strategies and cognitive styles of different students in developing

students' tolerance attitudes.

4. DISCUSSIONS

4.1. The Effect of Learning Strategies of Value Clarification and Social Inquiry

on Concept comprehension

The study findings showed significant difference in concept comprehension between value

clarification and social inquiry learning strategies. Students in social inquiry classes have

higher concept comprehension values compared to clarification classes. The advantages of

social inquiry strategies were consistent with opinions of several learning experts who use

social inquiry strategies as innovative learning to develop intellectual abilities and potential of

students, including emotional development. The social inquiry strategy makes students

practice to solve problems through instructional materials package by scientific steps like a

researcher.

The superiority of inquiry strategy is consistent with Ali Abdi (2014) to increase student

activity compared to traditional learning strategies. Olibie1 & Oge (2014) proved that

application of guided inquiry in social subjects can improve student learning outcomes.

Widiantara, A.G, et al (2013) explained that students who follow the social inquiry learning

model were better than conventional learning. The application of a social inquiry learning

model can drive the learning to trains and invites students to solve real problems in their daily

lives. Amaliyah (2017) shoed that inquiry learning binds students to be active in learning,

motivates students to build comprehension so this strategy was not only for cognitive

development, but also social, emotional and physical development. Raharjo et al (2015)

concluded that social inquiry can create a very conducive learning situation in accordance

with students potential, growing an open social communication and reciprocity between

students.

Characteristics of inquiry learning prioritize the reasoning, logical thinking, creative in

social problems solving through a scientific way by developing character values of honesty,

openness, tolerance, collaboration in discussion. Students have the courage to raise

hypotheses and arguments to find truth, responsibility in problem solving has a positive

attitude and future orientation and likes to work hard to solve problems.

4.2. The Effect of Cognitive Style on Concept Comprehension

The findings show there was no score difference in learning outcomes of concept

comprehension between students with of FD and FI cognitive style. The theory FD and FI

cognitive style can affect students' learning achievement, because individuals who have the




FD and FI cognitive style have differences in receiving or responding to stimuli from the

environment. Individuals with FI cognitive style were more thorough and detailed in

receiving and presenting information or stimuli from their environment compared to

individuals with FD cognitive style. Individuals with FI cognitive style were superior to

master natural and mathematical science materials. Okwo and Otubah (2007) found that

students with FI cognitive style were better than FD cognitive style in physics and biology.

The Ratumanan (2003) also showed that students with FI cognitive style have better

mathematics learning outcomes than students with FD cognitive style.

Individuals with a FD cognitive style were superior in social studies materials. Catherine

et al. (2005) found that students with FD cognitive style were best at social oriented learning

tasks. Students with FD cognitive style respond to stimuli thoroughly or globally. This has an

impact on mastery of broader and deeper social science material to contribute to improve

learning outcomes.

Some of study results provide an understanding that cognitive style as a variable

component of students' conditions to affects learning outcomes, but one day it may not have

an effect where some other learning factors were set to reduce the deficiencies of one

cognitive style. According to Witkin, FD cognitive style has a good memory for social

information, and both FD and FI do not show significant differences in learning outcomes of

concept comprehension, because Civics is a social science. In addition, supports of research

were the preparation of interesting instructional materials, raising actual issues so all types of

cognitive styles can learn with joyful learning. Teaching materials were arranged

systematically and hierarchically from easy to difficult material in accordance with learning

objectives.

In addition to support the teaching materials, application of social inquiry learning

strategies is appropriate to improve concept comprehensions. In learning implementation,

researcher saw the enthusiasm of all students to participate in learning, both value

clarification and social inquiry classes. All students were active in learning so they cannot

distinguish students who have a FD or FI cognitive style.

4.3. Interaction of Learning Strategies with Cognitive Style in Concept

Comprehension

The findings show the interaction between learning strategies and cognitive styles in concept

comprehension has a significance value of 0.589 > 0.05. This means that there was no

interaction between learning strategies with field dependence (FD) and field independence

(FI) cognitive styles for concepts comprehension. The interaction between learning strategies

and cognitive styles find ways that compatible with cognitive characteristics of FD or FI

cognitive styles in concept comprehension. It means the learning strategy that has been

applied in value clarification and social inquiry does not have significant effect to increase

concept comprehension for one particular cognition style, but can improve concept

comprehension for FD and FI cognitive styles

There is no interaction of learning strategies (value clarification or social inquiry) and

cognitive style in concept comprehension. The first possibility occurs because the two

strategies were too good. In other words, the two strategies were called superior if used to

achieve the learning outcomes of concept comprehension. The cognitive aspects of Bloom's

theory for concept comprehension were at second level (C2) so that possibility of being too

young is affordable. Both strategies were likely occur with cognitive style interactions if

learning objectives were higher than understanding the possible levels of cognitive synthesis

or evaluation. The second possibility is the anticipation of researchers with preparations in



form of teaching materials and learning media that can reduce the shortcomings of student

characteristics with FD and FI cognitive styles.

Above findings were consistent with Ratumanan (2003) to confirms that there was no

significant interaction of learning models and cognitive styles on student learning outcomes.

Tegeh (2010) showed there was no significant interaction between learning models and

cognitive styles on student learning outcomes. Nurwahyu (2012) also showed insignificance

effects of learning strategies and cognitive styles on students intellectual skill.

4.4. Differences in Student Tolerance Attitudes taught by VCT Learning and

Social Inquiry Strategies

The findings show that learning with VCT strategies was superior than social inquiry to

develop tolerance. VCT learning strategies have a better effect than social inquiry. Previous

studies examined the advantages of value clarification strategies to improve attitudes,

affective aspects, morals, and good values in society. Farizah Haris (2013) concluded that

VCT learning can increase the attitude of value awareness to respect the hero. Oliba and

Vivian (2015) showed that VCT can solve the dropout problem. Petru Lisievici and Mihai

Andronie (2016) concluded that teachers and students greatly appreciate the VCT strategy.

Pratama et al. (2017) showed that VCT learning with development of student analytical

techniques can understand local wisdom and find the values. VCT serves to clarify the values

in local wisdom and as a means to create student character.

The classroom atmosphere with VCT learning strategies is colored with freedom, and full

involvement of students to determine the values chosen to be implemented in daily life.

Therefore, students will have the freedom to choose the values and morality that will be done.

The chosen values and morality should develop into habits to become a culture pattern.

Therefore, the education of attitudes, morals and value through a value clarification strategy is

expected to foster tolerance needed by Indonesian in particular and humanity in world in

general.

4.5. Test the difference in tolerance attitudes for student with Cognitive Style of

Field Dependence (FD) and Field Independence (FI).

The findings showed that tolerance attitude is not affected by cognitive style of students.

Attitudes as learning outcomes were obtained through the learning process. The process of

attitude formation was not genetic or hereditary, but as a result of learning. It takes place

gradually. This research shoed that cognitive style as a trait of individual nature does not

significantly affect on tolerance attitude. Some research results the relationship of cognitive

styles and attitudes in learning can be used as references. Orhun (2007) showed there was no

relationship between learning styles and attitudes toward learning. Graff (2003) suggested that

cognitive style and attitude have no difference in online learning.

This finding is consistent with Ciccarelli & White's (2012) that "Most attitudes were

formed through experiential, observation, and persuasion". The carrier factor has no effect but

most attitudes were formed through experience, observation, and persuasion. Sinatra et al.

(2012) showed that persuasive messages and arguments can promote changes in attitude.

Persuasive messages include a number of written, oral or video materials such as newspapers,

articles, books, television programs, speeches, and websites. All of these materials promote

changes in attitude. Attitudes were also affected by other people or institutions that give

awards (Bograd & Sherrod, 2008). Citizens' attitudes will be realized in behavior to

participate in social and state life, including tolerance or respect for differences (Nelson,

Wade, & Kerr, 2010).




There were three components of attitude. The cognitive component is someone's belief

about what is valid. Affective component was an individual's feeling towards something,

which concerns emotional aspects; the conative component is a component of behavior, it is a

tendency to behave or a certain tendency to act in accordance with the attitude. The three

components were mutually supportive and related. Changes in attitude can be in form of

addition, transfer or modification of one or more of three components with possibility of one

or two components of attitude changing but the other components constant.

4.6. Interaction between Learning Strategies and Cognitive Style to Develop

Tolerance Attitudes.

Research findings indicate that there was an interaction between learning strategies and

cognitive styles in developing tolerance attitudes. It is to find suitable / accommodative ways

with certain student characteristics within tolerance development framework. The study result

interpretation was the applied of the learning strategies both value clarification and social

inquiry have a significantly impact to increase student tolerance of field dependence (FD) or

field independence (FI) cognitive style. The implementation of value clarification learning

strategy and social inquiry in order to develop tolerance with students' characteristics that

have a cognitive style of FD and FI was more suitable for one particular type of cognitive

style.

The research findings explain that VCT learning strategies were suitable especially for

students with FD cognitive style to foster a tolerance attitude. The analysis results were

consistent with students characteristics of FD cognitive style that more interested to observe

the social situation framework, understanding others, interested in verbal messages with social

content, greater in taking account of external social conditions as feeling to act. In certain

social situations, field dependence tends better, including warm, sociable, friendly and

responsive. Someone with field independence cognitive style tends to be less interested in

social phenomena and prefers to abstract ideas and principles, less warm in interpersonal

relationships.

5. CONCLUSIONS

There were differences in learning outcomes of concept comprehension between VCT

learning and social inquiry strategies. The class of social inquiry learning strategies has a

higher value clarification classes on concept comprehension. While different cognitive styles

have no effect on concept comprehension. The next finding was there was no interaction

between learning strategy and cognitive style to increase concept comprehensions. For student

tolerance improvement, it was concluded that there were differences between value

clarification and social inquiry classes. Value clarification classes get a higher tolerance than

social inquiry classes. While cognitive style does not affect to increase tolerance. The

interaction between learning strategies and cognitive style increase the students tolerance

attitudes.

REFERENCES

[1] Abdi, A. 2014. The Effect of Inquiry-based Learning Method on Students Academic

Achievement in Science Course. Universal Journal of Educational Research 2 (1): 37-4.

[2] Amaliyah, N. 2017. A Trans-disciplinary Approach and Inquiry-Based Learning Model of

Social Studies. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education.

[3] Blais, A., & St. Vincent, S. (2011). Personality traits, political attitudes and propensity to

vote. European journal of political Research, 50, 395–417,

http://dx.doi.org/10.111/j.1475-6765.2010.01935x.



[4] Bogard, K., & Sherrod, L. (2008) Citizenchip attitudes and allegiances in diverse youth.

Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 14(4), 286-296,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1099-9809.14.4.286. diakses 5/06/2017.

[5] Catherine, H.M. 2005. What affect student cognitive style in the development hypermedia

learning system?. Computers & Education 45 (2005) 1- 19(Online), (http:// web,

fsktm.um.edu-my/-nizam/article 6.pdf). diakses 16/02/1016.

[6] Ciccarelli, S., White, J. N. (2012). Psychology (3rd

ed). Singapore: Pearson Education

South Asia Pte Ltd.

[7] Fahyuni dan Adi Bandono, 2017. The use of clarification technique based-picture story

media as an alternative media to value education primary school. Harmonia : Journal of

Arts Research and educational 17 (1) 2007, 68 – 74.

[8] Fariza Haris.2013. Penerapan Model Pembelajaran VCTUntuk Meningkatkan Kesadaran

Nilai Menghargai Jasa Pahlawan Pada Siswa SD. Journal PGSD .

[9] Graff, M. 2003. Cognitive Style and Attitudes Towards Using Online Learning and

assessment Methods. Electrotic Journal of e-Learning. (Online), Volume 1 Issue 1 (2003)

21 – 28, (https://www rescachgatenet/profile/ Martin Graff/publication/228749159

Cognitive style and attitudes Towards Using Online Learning and assessment

Methods/link s/55b88ca108acc) diakses 7/10/2016.

[10] Lisievici Petru and Mihai Andronie, 2016. Teachers assessing the effectiveness of value

clarification technique in moral educational. Journal-Procedia-Social and Behavioral

Sciences 217 (2016) 400 – 406.

[11] Nucci, L dan Narvaez, D. 2008. Handbook Of Moral and Character Education: New

York: RouledgrTylor and Franci.

[12] Nurwahyu, 2012. Pengaruh strategi pembelajaran berbasis masalah terhadap

keterampilan intelektual siswa yang memiliki gaya kognitif berbeda dalam mata pelajaran

pendidikan kewarganegaraan di Sekolah Dasar Kota Malang. Desertasi tidak diterbitkan.

Program Pasca Sarjana Universitas Negeri Malang.

[13] Okwa, F. A. & Otubah, S. 2007. Influence of gender and Cognitive style on students’

achievement in physics essy test. Journal of the Science Teachers Association of Nigeria,

42 (1) 85-88.

[14] Oliba, Josephine, and Viviana, 2015. Effectiveness of Value Clarification and Self

management Techniques in Reducing Dropout Tendency Among Secondary Schools

Students in Edo State. European Journal of Educational and Development Psychology

Vol 3 No. 1,pp 1-13.

[15] Olibiel, E.I. & Ezeoba, K. O. 2014. Ability and Location Differences in The Effects of

Guided Inquiry on Nigerian Students’ Achievement in Social Studies Curriculum. Journal

of Education and Human Development.

[16] Orhun. N. 2007. An Investigation into the mathematics achievementand attitudetowords

mathematics with respect to learning style according togender International Journal of

mathematical Educational in Science and Technology, (Online) (http:www. Tandonline.

Com) diakses 19/2/2016.

[17] Pratama Yudi, dkk. 2017. The development of Means-Ends Analysis and value

Clarification Technique Integration Model to explore the local Wisdom in Historical

Learning. Journal of Educational and Learning Vo. 11 (2017) pp. 179-187. DOI:

10.11591/edulearn.v11i2.5752.

[18] Rai Roli. 2014. Comparative Effectiveness of Value Clarification and Role Playing Value

Development Models for Selected Values for Primary School Students. IQSR Journal Of

Humanities And Social Science (IQSR-JHSS). Vol. 19, issue 1 (Januari 2014) PP 28-34.

[19] Raharjo, Joko Tri, dkk. 2015. Eefektifitas Manajemen pendidikan Karakter Pilar

Konservasi Budaya melalui Inquiri sosial bagi mahasiswa PLS Universitas Negeri

semarang. Journal of Nonformal Education JNE 1 (1) (2015). Hal. 25 – 34.




[20] Ratumanan, T. G. 2003. Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran dan Gaya Kognitif Terhadap Hasil

Belajar Matematika. Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2003: 1 – 10.

[21] Sanjaya, Wina. 2012. Strategi Pembelajaran: Berorientasi Standar Proses Pendidikan.

Jakarta, : Kencana Prenada Media Group.

[22] Sudrajat .2011. Mewujudkan insan Cendekia mandiri dan bernurani Melalui metode

Values Clarification Technique Dalam Matakuliah Sejarah Lokal, Jurnal SOCIA edisi

Mei 2011, diakses Juni 2014.

[23] Suwarma, A. M. 2000. Pengembangan Kemampuan Berpikir dan Nilai Dalam Pendidikan

IPS. Bandung: Gelar Pustaka Mandiri Bandung.

[24] Taniredja, T. dan Efi, M. 2 0 1 1 . Model-model Pembelajaran Inovatif. Bandung:

Alfabeta

[25] Tegeh, I. M. 2009. Perbandingan Prestasi Belajar Mahasiswa yang diajar dengan

menggunakan Problem Based Learning dan Ekspositori yang Memiliki Gaya Kognitif

Berbeda. Disertasi PSSJ Teknologi Pembelajaran, PPS Universitas Negeri Malang.

[26] Tocqueville, A. 2000. It Can not be doubted that in the united states the instruction of the

people powerfully contributes to the support of the democratic republic. National Alliance

for Civic EducationalHtt://www.google.co.id//id//E;/Civic.htm.

[27] Wahab, A.A. 2008. Metode dan Model-Model Mengajar Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial (IPS).

Bandung: Alfabeta.

[28] Widiantara, A.G. 2013. Determinasi Penerapan Model Pembelajaran inquiri Sosial

Terhadap sikap Sosial dan Hasil Belajar IPS Siswa Kelas VIII SMP Negeri 3 Singaraja.

Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha Singaraja, Indonesia.

[29] Winataputra, U.S. 2008. Teori Belajar dan Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Universitas Terbuka.

[30] Wong, Y.L. 2009. Globalisation, Imperalism, and Non-Governmental Organizations: An

Ilustration With the Country Programme Belarus-Ukraine-Moldova of Civic Education

Project. International Journal of Social Science Inquiry. Vol 2, No. 1. 2009. P 39-58.

Documents

New THE EFFECT OF VALUE CLARIFICATION LEARNING … · 2018. 11. 30. · Lisievici and Andronie (2016) conclude that students more appreciate VCT than traditional strategies. The superiority