The Effectiveness of Learning Basic Concepts of Art for Primary Teacher Education Students Using Nomor Acak Learning Models

The nomor acak learning model is done by randomly giving number to each student and making them remember it from the beginning to the end of the lecture. The function was to make each student be more active in the teaching and learning activities, since they must be prepared with their respective material if the number was called. This research employed a quasi-experimental research method with one group pre-test/post-test design. The determinant coefficient data of the effect of nomor acak models on the effectiveness of primary teacher education students obtained a class A data of 58.21%, class B of 36% and class C of 23%. This research was conducted at the primary teacher education program for six months in the Basic Concepts of Art courses to students of 2018. It could be concluded that the nomor acak learning model could improve the learning outcomes of students of the primary teacher education program in the Basic Concepts of Art course.

INTRODUCTION ~ Nomor acak learning model was developed by Zufriady and Syahrilfuddin by producing a theory about some steps of learning that have gained validation from experts and practitioners so that the theory is feasible to use (Zufriady et al, 2018). Nomor acak learning model is done by randomly giving a number to each student and making them always remember this number from the beginning to the end of the lecture. The function was to make each student be more active in teaching and learning process, since they must be prepared with their respective material if the number is called. Besides that, each student must pay full attention during the learning activities because at the end of the class, the lecturer will mention some randomized numbers and ask the respective students to answer some questions to create learning motivation (Zufriady, & Syahrilfuddin, 2017). Learning styles vary so that the lecturer must become a reliable facilitator in providing learning (Buchori, & Setyawati, 2015) as evidence that the teacher/lecturer is a professional person who has pedagogical and social skills as a capital for conducting classroom learning using the right learning model (Ghullam, & Yulianto, 2018). This is also based on a learning theory stating that learning principles must provide challenges to [33] make students play an active role in the learning process (Andurrahman, 2008 This model also provides an opportunity for all students to be active in each step of learning because numbers will be drawn on every occasion and no exception for numbers that have been randomized. For students who are not active in the learning process, when they get the random number, they must speak. If they do not speak, the number will be saved and asked to repeat for the following meetings.
Any topic discussion will be appreciated even if it is the wrong answer, and then the number is randomized to determine someone who will correct the answer from their friend. After that, it will be corrected by the teacher. Randomizing this numbers can be conducted in several ways, either by making sweepstakes by writing  conducted on the pretest and posttest score.

Posttest Score Analysis
Posttest score is a result of tests given to students after being treated. The purpose of the posttest is to determine the effect of the applied treatment to students. The final test results are presented the following Table 2.

Normality Test
The normality test was carried out after analyzing the initial and the final test score.
The normality test for this data was conducted by using Kolmogorov-Smirnov.
The normality test was used to determine whether pretest and posttest score data were normally distributed, with the following hypotheses being tested: Ho: Pretest scores are normally distributed.
Ha: Posttest scores are not normally distributed.
In class 18 A, hypothesis testing used a significant level α = 0.05 and D table = 0.210 with the following criteria: If a max ≤ table, then Ho is accepted, meaning data is normally distributed.
If a max > Dtable, then Ho is rejected, meaning the data is not normally distributed.
The results of calculating the normality test for class 18 A on the pretest and posttest is presented in the following Table 3.  The results of calculating the normality test for class 18 C on the pretest and posttest is presented in the following Table 5. The calculation results of variance homogeneity in pretest score of class 18 A is presented in the following Table 6. In class 18 B with a significant level of α = 0.05, it was found that Ftable was 1.74.
Learning outcomes that had been tested for homogeneity are presented in the following Table 7.

Difference Test
Based on the normality test and homogeneity test on pretest score and posttest score, it was found that the learning outcomes of students were normally distributed and homogeneous.
Furthermore, a t-test was carried out to determine whether or not there was a significant difference between the average score of pretest and posttest. To analyze the difference between pretest and posttest scores of learning outcomes using pretest and posttest one group design, the following hypotheses were tested: Ho: There is no significant difference between pretest and posttest of students.
Ha: There are significant differences between pretest and posttest of students.
In class 18 A, hypothesis testing used a significant level α = 0.05 and ttable = 2.0359 with the following criteria: tcount ≤ ttable then Ho is accepted and Ha is rejected. The results of t-test on pretest and posttest scores are presented in the following Table   9.  more active in reading learning process because they were waiting for the emerging number by using the android application in randomizing the numbers that would present the material.
The magnitude of increase in learning outcomes before and after treatment was given using nomor acak learning model calculated by a normalized gain formula.
The results of an increase in score before