ABSTRACT
Artha, Annisa Alifvia. 2020. The
Application of TGT (Teams Games Tournament) and TGfU (Teaching Game for
Understanding) to Learning Motivation and Volley Ball Under Passing Skills,
Thesis, Sports Education Study
Program, Postgraduate, Surabaya State University. Supervisor : (I) Dr. Abdul Rahman Syam
T, M.Pd and (II) Dr.
Anung Priambodo, M.Psi.T
Keyword: TGT,
TGfU, Learning Motivation, Volley Ball Under Passing Skills
The process of knowledge transfer
occurs when the teacher gives an teaching material who will be practiced by
students and support them, the teacher must have effective, efficient and
pleasure learning plan. Beside that, students abilities are improve after doing
sports. Then the aim of physical education are training in motion, physical and
motor skills, and improve the fuction of body organs.
This study aim to improve and
analyze the TGT and TGfU learning models toward increase learning motivation
and volley ball under passing skills.
Non randomized cotrol group
pretest-posttest design is used in this study, it use a questionnaire to know
students volley ball under passing skills.
The result showed learning motivation in TGT
group increased 11,18%, in TGfU group increased 5,76% and 0,35% in control
group. When the volley ball under passing skills increase 19,56% in TGT group,
15,48% in TGfU group, and 9,12% in control group. Independent sample t test
show 0,007 < 0,05 it is mean Ho was rejected so there are learning motivation
level between TGT and TGfU models, while 0,829 > 0,05 showed volley ball under
passing skills, it is mean Ho was accepted so there are volley ball under
passing skills level between TGT and TGfU models.
Paired sample t test show the TGT
(0,000), TGfU (0,000), and control (0,003) < 0,05 then Ho was rejected, it
means there are differences between learning motivation pretest and posttest in
the three groups. When the volley ball under passing skills only show TGT
(0.001) and TGfU (0,000) < 0,05 then Ho was rejected ,so there are
significant difference in under passing skills for learning models, but did not
change in control group (0,059.