See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/350591196

The Application of Learning Cycle 7E Model to Improve a Mathematics

Communication Skills of Junior High School Students

Conference Paper  in  AIP Conference Proceedings · April 2021

DOI: 10.1063/5.0041644

CITATIONS READS

0 13

3 authors, including:

Samsul Arifin Arumella Surgandini

Binus University College of Teacher Education
44 PUBLICATIONS   49 CITATIONS    6 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Analisis Hambatan Belajar Mahasiswa Papua Sebagai Upaya Meningkatkan Kemampuan Pemahaman Materi dan Menumbuhkan Karakter Percaya Diri Dalam Perkuliahan
Aljabar Linear View project

Pendidikan Matematika View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Samsul Arifin on 02 April 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

The application of learning cycle 7E model
to improve a mathematics communication
skills of junior high school students
Cite as: AIP Conference Proceedings 2331, 020001 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0041644
Published Online: 02 April 2021

Nurochmah, Samsul Arifin, and Arumella Surgandini

AIP Conference Proceedings 2331, 020001 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0041644 2331, 020001

© 2021 Author(s).
 The Application of Learning Cycle 7E Model to Improve a
Mathematics Communication Skills of Junior High School
Students
Nurochmah1, b), Samsul Arifin2, a), and Arumella Surgandini1, c)
1
Mathematics Education Department, STKIP Surya, Tangerang, Indonesia 15115
2
Department of Mathematics, School of Computer Science, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta, Indonesia 11480
a)
Corresponding author: samsul.arifin@binus.ac.id
b)
nurochmah@students.stkipsurya.ac.id
c)
arumella.surgandini@stkipsurya.ac.id

Abstract. Mathematical communication skills are one of the important abilities possessed by students in learning
mathematics. Based on several results of the literature study showed that students' mathematical communication skills
are still relatively low. One effort that can be done to improve students' mathematical communication skills is to apply
the 7E learning cycle learning model. The purpose of this study is to investigate the improvement in mathematical
communication skills of students who use the 7E learning cycle learning model is higher than students who use
conventional learning. This type of research is a quasi-experiment using pre-and posttest design. The population in this
study were students of class VIII of Junior High School 1 Gantung and the sample of this study was students of grades
VIII C and VIII D. The sampling technique used was convenience sampling. The research instrument used to answer the
problem formulation was an instrument of mathematical communication ability test in the form of the problem
description. The subject in this study is the prism material. The formulation of the problem in this study was answered by
inferential statistics using the pooled variance model t-test. The results showed that an average increase in mathematical
communication skills was 0.330 for the experimental class and 0.241 for the control class so that the conclusion was that
the increase in mathematical communication skills of students who used the 7E learning cycle learning model was higher
than that of students using conventional learning.

INTRODUCTION
There are five standard process competencies in mathematics, that is problem solving, representation,
connection, communication, and reasoning and proof [1]. Communication skills are also listed as one of the goals of
mathematics learning [2]. Moreover, Clark states some of the roles of communication skills in mathematics [3].
Therefore, mathematical communication skills have an important role in learning, so this ability needs to be owned
by students so that the goals of mathematics learning can be achieved.
Given the importance of mathematical communication skills, this means students must master mathematical
communication skills well. From several studies of TIMSS (Trends International Mathematics and Science Study), it
was found that one of the mathematical abilities that were classified as low was mathematical communication skills,
that we can see in Figure 1. This question measures students' mathematical communication skills [4].

The 2nd Science and Mathematics International Conference (SMIC 2020)

AIP Conf. Proc. 2331, 020001-1–020001-7; https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0041644
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-4075-3/$30.00

020001-1
 Popularity of a music group
The diagram above shows the results of a survey of 400 students
about their interest in rock groups: Dreadlocks, Red Hot Peppers,
and Stone Cold. Make a bar chart that illustrates the data
presented in the pie chart above!

FIGURE 1. About the 2007 TIMMS

Internationally, the students who answered correctly was 27%, while Indonesian students were only 14%. It can
be concluded that the students' mathematical communication skills are still low based on the analysis of the question
indicators [5]. Observations made by other researchers also said that junior high school students' communication
skills were still low, that is in Garut Jawa Barat by Rahmayanti [6] and in Gorontalo by Jailani, et al. [7]. Izzati
stated that mathematical communication skills were low because in general the mathematics learning process carried
out paid less attention [8]. It do not develop optimally when students are passive and only listen to the delivery of
material provided by the teacher [also see 7].
One of the efforts to improve mathematical communication skills is to provide opportunities for students to argue
against each answer and provide responses to the answers given [9]. Then, Arin and Soedjoko [10] stated that one of
the activities that can provide opportunities for students to argue is when there is a group discussion. Constructivism
learning is learning that requires an educator to be able to create a learning process so that students are actively
involved and students are required to construct their knowledge [11]. You also can read about facing the industrial
revolution 4.0. [12, 13]. This activity will certainly run well when there are teachers who are ready to become
facilitators using appropriate learning models in the learning process[14]. Therefore, to practice mathematical
communication skills learning needs to be done with the use of appropriate learning models.
One learning model based on constructivism is the learning model learning cycle 7E. This model developed by
Eisenkraft. This change aims is to ensure that the teacher as a facilitator does not eliminate important elements in the
learning process, that is emphasizing the importance of raising understanding of previous learning material and
expanding or learning to transfer concepts. It is is a constructivism based learning model consisting of seven stages
of learning [15]. At the stage of exploration, explanation, and elaboration of students' mathematical communication
skills can be trained. Moreover, students with the explanation stage will have better scientific communication skills
[16].
Research conducted by Priambodo, et al. [9] and Arin and Soedjoko [10] stated that the mathematical
communication skills of students who were treated with the 5E learning cycle model were better than other models.
Furthermore, Pitriati [17] applies the 7E learning cycle model, the results of the study show that the communication
skills and mathematical reasoning abilities of students who get the 7E learning cycle are better than conventional
learning. From several sources, there are not many studies on the 7E learning cycle model with mathematical
communication skills. On the other hand, researchers are interested in applying the 7E learning cycle to examine
students' mathematical communication skills in schools that have never been studied.

Mathematical Communication Skills

In this article, the skills to be measured are abilities in expressing mathematical communication skills in writing.
By several sources [18, 19], the indicators that will be used: 1) represent images in the form of mathematical ideas;
2) explain ideas using pictures and algebraic expressions; and 3) compile arguments or express opinions and provide
explanations for answers.

020001-2
 Learning Cycle 7E Model
At first, the learning cycle consisted of three stages developed by Atkin and Karplus, that is exploration,
invention, and discovery. Then the five-stage learning cycle or called the 5E learning cycle [20]. Then Artur
Eisenkraft made an update by adding learning stages related to the concept of the teaching process without changing
the important stages of the 5E learning cycle to the 7E learning cycle [15]. This change aims is to ensure the teacher
as a facilitator does not eliminate the important elements in the learning process, namely emphasizing the
importance of raising previous understanding and expanding or learning to transfer concepts.

BSCS 5E Esienkraft 7E
Atkin and
Karplus Elicit
Engagement
Exploration Engagement

Exploration Exploration
Invention
Explanation Explanation

Elaboration Elaboration
Discovery
Evaluation Evaluation

Extended

FIGURE 2. Development of Learning Cycle Model Stages

From the description above, the steps that implemented in this article are based on Sadia [16], which is an
explanation of the learning steps based on Eisenkarft.

Conventional Learning
Conventional learning here, that is a method listed in the Learning Implementation Plan (RPP) of the school. The
learning methods listed in the lesson plan are lectures, discussions. In general, the core activities in the learning
process carried out, namely 1) the teacher conveys learning material interspersed with questions and answers, 2) the
teacher provides discussion material in the form of practice questions, and 3) the teacher and the students discuss the
practice questions [6, 7].

METHOD
We use a quasi-experiment research method with pre-posttest design [21]. In this study, there are two groups:
experimental and control. The research design carried out is as follows.

FIGURE 3. Research Design

In this design, two groups were then given a pretest to determine students' abilities before being given treatment.
The experimental and control groups were given the treatment after being given a pretest. Learning 7E learning
cycle is given to the experimental group and conventional learning is given to the control group. Then the last
activity after being given treatment is giving the same posttest as pretest.

020001-3
 The population in this study is one of the schools in East Belitung Regency, namely students of Junior High
School 1 Gantung class VIII in the academic year 2016/2017. The sampling technique used was convenience
sampling. Convenience sampling, namely selecting samples based on availability. The intended availability, ie, the
sample is available and available for research, with sample selection based on consideration from the school that
provides two classes to be sampled. The two classes are class VIII C and VIII D of Junior High School 1 Gantung.
In this case, the sample is not said to fully represent the population, but the sample can provide useful information to
answer the research hypothesis [21]. In this study, the sample used was two groups of equal ability.
Data collection techniques in this study are tests of mathematical communication skills, namely the provision of
pretest and posttest. Pretest and posttest are described to provide an overview of the characteristics of the data. Then
the pretest and posttest data are also used to get the normalized change data analyzed in this study.
The instrument used in this study was a mathematical communication ability test instrument. This instrument is
used to measure students' mathematical communication skills before (pretest) and after (posttest) the implementation
of learning. This instrument is validated by an expert first before being used in research. Then after that, empirical
validation is done, which is tested first and then analyzed to find out the quality.
Normalized change data analysis is used to get the improvement of the mathematical communication skills after
being given treatment. Normalized change data is obtained from pretest and posttest data. The normalized change
formula developed by Mark and Cumming which will be used to calculate the amount of increment before and after
learning [22]. The normalized change formula used is as follows.

100
100 0
0

After normalized change data for each student in the experimental class and the control class are obtained, then
inferential statistical analysis is performed. Normalized change data analysis, which is used to test hypotheses
regarding the two averages of two independent samples.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The learning process in the experimental class is to use the 7E learning cycle learning while the control class
uses conventional. The implementation of learning in the experimental class by using the 7E learning cycle learning
in three general meetings can be seen in Figure 4.

FIGURE 4. Process of Learning Cycle 7E Model

020001-4
 The 7E learning cycle learning consists of seven stages of learning. The first stage in this learning model is the
elicit stage, then the engagement, exploration, explanation, elaboration, evaluation stage and finally the extended
stage. Meanwhile, the control class is learning directly by the teacher.
Mathematical communication skills of students using the 7E learning cycle learning model can be trained at the
exploration, explanation and elaboration stages. Then to construct his knowledge by discussing with his friends it
was carried out at the exploration and elaboration stages. The second stage is the stage where many students are
allowed to argue against each answer, and respond to the answers when the discussion is working on the worksheet.
Priambodo et al. [9] state that allowing students to argue more is one way to practice students' mathematical
communication skills. Then in the explanation stage, students are allowed to present the results obtained at the
exploration stage.
The subject that is taught in this research is prism material. The process of delivering material was carried out
three times, then two meetings were held for each pretest at the first meeting and the fifth meeting was held posttest.
At the second meeting, the material presented was to identify the properties, parts, and networks of prisms. The
notion about the area of the prism at the third meeting. Furthermore, at the fourth meeting is the prism volume
material.
The implementation of learning with the 7E learning cycle learning in the material delivery process can be seen
in the following Table 1.
TABLE 1. Implementation of Learning Learning Cycle 7E Learning Model
Learning Second meeting Third meeting The fourth meeting
Stages
The teacher asks the material The teacher asks previous The teacher asks material
Elicit questions beforehand, which is about material questions, which are questions beforehand, which is
the material of the cube and the block. about the nature, parts, and webs about the surface area of the
of prism. prism.
The teacher provides motivation to The teacher raises the problem The teacher raises the issue of
arouse students' interest and curiosity of whatever flat shapes form whether or not the area of the
about the topic to be discussed by prism nets. Then how many prism's surface determines the
Engagement showing a variety of props of building volume of the prism.
cubes, blocks, and prisms. And linking stickers are needed to attach to
the wake of space in everyday life. the prism net?

Students learn to construct their own
knowledge by discussing with
Exploration classmates to work on Student
Worksheet activity 1.
Group representatives were asked to
Explanation present the results obtained at the
exploration stage.
Students discuss with classmates
to do activity 1 to learn to build
their own knowledge of the
prism surface area formula.
Group representatives were
asked to present the results
obtained at the exploration stage.
Students learn to construct their
own knowledge about the prism
volume formula by discussing
with classmates to work on
activity 1.
The results obtained at the
exploration stage were presented
by students.

Students do activity 2 with an Students do activity 2 with an Students do activity 2 with an

Elaboration understanding of the concepts that
have been obtained at the exploration
stage.
The teacher and the students
recapitulated the learning that had
Evaluation been learned. Then students are asked
to work on evaluation questions.
The teacher asks students questions
about material related to the next
Extended material, namely, about the surface
area of a flat shape. This question will
be discussed further at the next
meeting.
understanding of the concepts
that have been obtained at the
exploration stage.
The teacher and the students
recapitulated the learning that
had been learned. Then students
are asked to work on evaluation
questions.
The teacher asks students
questions about material related
to the next material, namely, the
volume of prism. This question
will be discussed further at the
next meeting.
understanding of the concepts that
have been obtained at the
exploration stage.
The teacher and the students
recapitulated the learning that had
been learned. Then students are
asked to work on evaluation
questions.
The teacher asks questions to
students about material related to
the next material, namely, about
building space other than cubes,
beams, and prisms.

020001-5
 There is a difference in the activity between the experimental and the control class.
The learning process provides more opportunities for students to construct their knowledge by discussing with their
friends using the 7E Learning Cycle learning in the experimental class.This makes students more enthusiastic when
asked to work on problems in the worksheet. Students in the experimental class are also more active in discussions
and do not hesitate to ask the teacher if there are things that are not understood.
Meanwhile, the learning process in the control class, the students listened more and immediately recorded the
results delivered by the teacher, because the material in the control class was more directly centered by the teacher.
Learning in this control class causes students to tend to be passive and unenthusiastic when asked to work on
exercises given after the teacher has finished explaining the material. Also, students are not trained to construct their
knowledge.
Data obtained from this study, namely data from the pretest, posttest results, and normalized change data for the
two-class groups. The summary of the pretest, posttest, and normalized change data can be seen in Table 2 below.
TABLE 2. Descriptive Data Pretest, Posttest, and Normalized Change
Class Group Information Pretest Posttest Normalized Change
Experiment Average 11.85 39.54 0.330
Standard Deviation 14.34 20.38 0.172
Maximum Value 64 86 0.702
Minimum Value 0 10 0.100
Many students 26

Control Average 10.08 30.96 0.241

Standard Deviation 9.87 14.99 0.123
Maximum Value 52 80 0.583
Minimum Value 0 8 0.021
Many students 25

This descriptive data cannot be used to answer the problem formulation in this study. Therefore, the research
hypothesis testing was carried out by analyzing normalized inferential statistical data to answer the problem
formulations in this study. Analysis of normalized change data was carried out to test the hypothesis to determine
whether the increase in students' mathematical communication skills using the 7E learning cycle learning was higher
than students who used conventional learning.
After it is known that the normalized change data of the two groups is normally distributed and has
homogeneous variance, the next step is to test the difference of two averages to find out whether the increase in the
average mathematical communication ability of the experimental class students is higher than that of the control
class students. The test used is the formula pooled variance t-test model. The hypothesis used is as follows.
0 : 1 2
1 : 1 2

1
average experimental class
2
average control class
0 : The average improvement in mathematical communication skills of the experimental class students was not
higher than that of the control class students.
1 : The increase in the average mathematical communication skills of the experimental class students was
higher than that of the control class students.
From the results of the analysis of the test differences, two averages are obtained that t 2.0269 and t
for one party test (0.05;49) 1.678. This shows that t t so H is rejected. From this analysis, it can be
concluded that the average increase in mathematical communication skills of the experimental class students is
higher than that of the control class students.

CONCLUSION
By analysis, we concluded that the increase in mathematical communication skills of students who use the 7E
cycle learning model is higher than conventional learning. The results showed that an average increase in
mathematical communication skills was 0.330 for the experimental class and 0.241 for the control class.

020001-6
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We would like to thank the principal and as well as teachers in Junior High School 1 Gantung who have
provided the opportunity for writers to research Junior High School 1 Gantung. Besides that, the researcher also
wishes to thank Bina Nusantara University for your support with the help of facilities, funding, and infrastructure
that has been given. Thank you.

REFERENCES
1. W.G. Martin, Principle and Standard for school Mathematics, (The National Council of Teacher Mathematics,
2000).
2. DEPDIKNAS, Standar Kompetensi dan Kompetensi Dasar SMP/Mts (Badan Nasional Standar Pendidikan,
Jakarta)
3. M. Asikin and I. Junaedi, Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research, pp. 151-157 (2013).
4. S. Wardhani and R. Rumiati, Instrumen Penilaian Hasil Belajar Matematika SMP: Belajar dari PISA dan
TIMSS (Kementerian Pendidikan Nasional, Yogyakarta, 2011).
5. S.P. Nasution, Penerapan Aktivitas Scrambled Groups Dalam Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif untuk
Meningkatkan Kemampuan Pemahaman dan Komunikasi Matematis Siswa Mts. (Universitas Pendidikan
Indonesia, Bandung , 2013)
6. D. Rahmayanti, Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 3 (1), pp. 1-10 (2014).
7. N.A. Jailani, H. Evi and Z. Perry, Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Inkuiri terhadap Kemampuan Komunikasi
Matematika Siswa pada Materi Luas Permukaan dan Volume Kubus dan Balok (Universitas Negeri Gorontalo,
2015).
8. S. Prayitno, S. Suwarsono and T.Y. Siswono, Prosiding Konferensi Nasional Pendidikan Matematika V (2013),
pp. 384-389.
9. A.S. Priambodo, S. Sugiarto and A.N. Cahyono, Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education, 3 (2), pp. 94-100
(2014).
10. A. Arin and Soedjoko, Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education, 3 (3), pp. 152-157 (2014).
11. S.M. Wardoyo, Pembelajaran Konstruktivisme: Teori dan Aplikasi Pembelajaran dalam Pembentukan
Karakter, (Alfabeta, Bandung, 2013).
12. N.P. Murnaka, Q. Almaisurie and S. Arifin, International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research
(IJSTR), 8 (9), pp. 439-441 (2019).
13. S. Wijaya, S. Arifin and N.P. Murnaka, International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research (IJSTR), 8
(11), pp. 542-546 (2019).
14. F.R. Ardina and C. Sa'dijah, Konferensi Nasional Penelitian dan Pembelajaran (Universitas Muhammadiyah
Surakarta, Surakarta, 2016), pp. 363-376.
15. A. Eisenkraft, Expanding the 5E model (Science Teacher, Washington, 2003), pp. 56-59.
16. I. W. Sadia, Model - Model Pembelajaran Sains Konstruktivistik (Graha Ilmu, Yogyakarta, 2014)
17. P. Pitriati. “Pengaruh Penerapan Model Learning Cycle 7E terhadap Peningkatan Kemampuan Penalaran dan
Kemampuan Komunikasi Matematis Siswa SMP” thesis, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, 2014.
18. H. Heris and U. Soemarmo, Penilaian Pembelajaran Matematika, (Refika Aditama, Bandung, 2014).
19. K.E. Lestari and M.R. Yudhanegara, Penelitian Pendidikan Matematika (Refika Aditama, Bandung, 2015).
20. R.W. Bybee, et al., Colorado Springs, 5, pp. 88-98 (2006).
21. J.W. Creswell, Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative
Research, (Pearson, Boston, 2012).
22. J.D. Mark and K. Cumming, American Journal of Physics, pp. 87-91 (2007).

020001-7
View publication stats