PROGRESS http://ejournal.lppm-unbaja.ac.id/index.php/progress <p>PROGRESS Jurnal Pendidikan, Akuntansi dan Keuangan&nbsp;</p> en-US fitrinurlaili@unbaja.ac.id (Fitri Nurlaili) Fri, 08 Mar 2019 10:27:19 +0000 OJS 3.1.1.2 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss 60 EVALUASI PELAKSANAAN PPLK1 DI UNBAJA http://ejournal.lppm-unbaja.ac.id/index.php/progress/article/view/478 <p><em>Learning Process of PPLK 1 or micro teaching </em><em>wa</em><em>s a Learning Process that learn about the practice of teaching for students that involves </em><em>their </em><em>classmates who bec</em><em>a</em><em>me learners in the learning process.</em> <em>The purpose of this research were : 1) to know how to prepare PPLK 1 in UNBAJA, 2) to know how </em><em>was l</em><em>earning </em><em>p</em><em>rocess of PPLK 1 in UNBAJA, 3) to know how </em><em>was </em><em>the facility for PPLK 1 in UNBAJA.</em> <em>This research used qualitative approach method. The object of research were the dean of FKIP, lecturer of PPLK 1 and the student</em><em>s</em><em> of Accounting Education Program on semester 6. In this research the data collection technique</em><em>s</em><em> were interview, observation and documentation. Data analysis in this research used descriptive qualitative.</em> <em>The results showed that</em><em> thel</em><em>earning </em><em>p</em><em>rocess </em><em>of </em><em>PPLK 1 at the University of Banten Jaya has been running well</em><em>,</em><em> student </em><em>l</em><em>earning </em><em>p</em><em>rocess could perform in front class confidently and they could teach like as a teacher. However, </em><em>the l</em><em>earning </em><em>p</em><em>rocess </em><em>still </em><em>need improvements</em><em>, especially</em><em> in time</em><em> management</em><em> and procurement of infrastructure facilities to support the PPLK 1</em></p> Haryati Haryati, Budi Mulyati ##submission.copyrightStatement## budimulyati@unbaja.ac.id http://ejournal.lppm-unbaja.ac.id/index.php/progress/article/view/478 Mon, 11 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0000 PENELITIAN TINDAKAN KELAS MODEL GROUP TO GROUP EXCHANGE http://ejournal.lppm-unbaja.ac.id/index.php/progress/article/view/483 <p><em>This research aims to know the application of cooperative learning model of type group to group exchange on subjects of financial accounting as well as knowing the results of learning students after teaching and learning activities using the learning model Group to group exchange.This research used classroom action research with two cycles and each cycles consist of four steps : planning, action, observing and reflection. The results of this research show that the model of the learning group to group exchange can improve student learning activities. The results of the observation activities of students in cycle </em><em>1 </em><em>of 70% and cycle </em><em>&nbsp;2 </em><em>of 90%. In addition, the results of this research also shows that the model of the learning group to group exchange can also improve student learning outcomes. In cycle </em><em>1</em><em>, of 31 students in attendance who managed to reach the KKM of 61.29%</em><em>, with average result 80,74</em><em> while on cycle </em><em>2</em><em> of </em><em>33 </em><em>students in attendance who managed to reach the KKM of 8</em><em>9,19</em><em>%.</em><em>with average result 84,61.</em></p> Tanti Rahmawati, Fitri Nurlaili ##submission.copyrightStatement## fitrinurlaili@unbaja.ac.id http://ejournal.lppm-unbaja.ac.id/index.php/progress/article/view/483 Mon, 11 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0000 PENGARUH PERSEPSI KOMPETENSI DASAR DOSEN TERHADAP MOTIVASI BELAJAR MAHASISWA http://ejournal.lppm-unbaja.ac.id/index.php/progress/article/view/486 <p><em>This study aims determine the effect of Lecturer on the Motivation of Student Learning Result of Accounting Education Program Education Faculty at Banten Jaya University. This research uses quantitative approach method. The subjects of the study are students of Accounting Education Program Education Faculty at Banten Jaya University. In this research data technique used is questionnaire or questionnaire to 69 respondentsfrom 82 Accounting Education study program students.The method used in this research is descriptive research method, and practical analysis of data analysis, validity test, reliability test, normality test, homogeneity test, analysis, simple linear regression analysis, significance test (f test, t test, coefficient of determination).From the results of data analysis that has been done to obtain the results that include the category "High Quality Basic Competence Lecturer" with a percentage of 78.63%. Meanwhile, the motivation of student learning outcomes is categorized as "Highly Motivated" with a score of 3.98. The results obtained from the obtained motivation of 0.686 which means that Lecturer Basic Competence (X) to Motivation Student Outcomes (Y) is equal to 68.8% and the rest of 31.2% by other variables not examined. Thus it can be concluded that there is a significant influence between Basic Competence of Lecturers to Motivation Student Results this is because the value of t count&gt; t table (7.711&gt; 1.667) or significance &lt;0.05 (0.000 &lt;0.05) so that Ho is rejected.</em></p> Reni Febriani, Sudaryono Sudaryono, Siti Rohmah ##submission.copyrightStatement## renote28@gmail.com http://ejournal.lppm-unbaja.ac.id/index.php/progress/article/view/486 Mon, 11 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0000 PENGARUH TINGKAT PENDIDIKAN TERHADAP PRESTASI KERJA KARYAWAN http://ejournal.lppm-unbaja.ac.id/index.php/progress/article/view/488 <ol> <li>Indonesia Power UP Suralaya Cilegon as one of the State-Owned Enterprises currently employs as many as 733 people with various expertise and education levels.With the large number of employees/worker involved in the company PT. Indonesia Power UP Suralaya Cilegon, researchers are interested in reviewing or knowing whether there is a significant influence on the level of education on the work performance of employees in the company. The method used in this research is descriptive method with quantitative analysis. The sample in this study were 110 employees from 733 employees of PT Indonesia Power UpSuralayaCilegon. Data collection techniques used are questionnaire methods. The data analysis technique used is multiple linear regression analysis technique with the hypothesis test used is the t test and F test. Based on the results of the study it can be concluded that (1) The results of the calculation of the percentage of employee education level taken based on the respondent's overall answer of 80% which shows that most of the employees in the company have high school / vocational education. 2) With a significance of 5% it can be obtained the price of r table 1.661. It turns out that r count is greater than r table (0.276&gt; 1.661), so the Hypothesis is rejected so that the Education Level does not have a significant effect on Employee Performance. Judging from the results of the output on the analysis of the calculation of the t test above, it can be concluded that the variable level of employee education does not affect employee performance. This is because the value of t count&gt; t table (-2.240 &lt;1.661) or significance &lt;0.05 (0.029 &lt;0.05) so the hypothesis is rejected.</li> </ol> Iba Gunawan, Muhamad Riza ##submission.copyrightStatement## ibagunawan@unbaja.ac.id http://ejournal.lppm-unbaja.ac.id/index.php/progress/article/view/488 Mon, 11 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0000 PENGARUH KEAKTIFAN BELAJAR & KECERDASAN EMOSIONAL TERHADAP PRESTASI BELAJAR MAHASISWA http://ejournal.lppm-unbaja.ac.id/index.php/progress/article/view/490 <p><em>The</em> <em>purpose</em> <em>of</em> <em>this</em> <em>study</em> <em>was</em> <em>to</em> <em>determine</em> <em>1)</em> <em>inflence</em> <em>of</em> <em>student</em> <em>learning</em> <em>activeness</em> <em>on</em> <em>learning</em> <em>achievement.</em> <em>2)</em> <em>influence</em> <em>of</em> <em>emotional</em> <em>intelligence</em> <em>on</em> <em>learning</em> <em>achievement.</em> <em>3)</em> <em>the</em> <em>influence</em> <em>of</em> <em>learning</em> <em>activeness</em> <em>&amp;</em> <em>emotional</em> <em>intelligence</em> <em>on</em> <em>learning</em> <em>achievement.</em> <em>This</em> <em>type</em> <em>of</em> <em>research</em> <em>is</em> <em>quantitative</em> <em>descriptive</em> <em>research.</em> <em>This</em> <em>study</em> <em>took</em> <em>place</em> <em>at</em> <em>the</em> <em>University</em> <em>of</em> <em>Banten</em> <em>Jaya,</em> <em>the</em> <em>Teaching</em> <em>and</em> <em>Education</em> <em>Faculty,</em> <em>majoring</em> <em>in</em> <em>Accounting.</em> <em>&nbsp;</em><em>The</em> <em>population</em> <em>in</em> <em>this</em> <em>study</em> <em>were</em> <em>all</em> <em>students</em> <em>of</em> <em>the</em> <em>FKIP</em> <em>Accounting</em> <em>Education</em> <em>University</em> <em>of</em> <em>Banten</em> <em>Jaya,</em> <em>the</em> <em>population</em> <em>in</em> <em>this</em> <em>study</em> <em>were</em> <em>84</em> <em>students.</em> <em>Data</em> <em>collection</em> <em>techniques</em> <em>using</em> <em>questionnaire</em> <em>and</em> <em>docimentation</em> <em>techniques.</em> <em>The</em> <em>analysis</em> <em>technique</em> <em>used</em> <em>is</em> <em>multiple</em> <em>linear</em> <em>regression</em> <em>analysis.</em> <em>Test</em> <em>of</em> <em>the</em> <em>significance</em> <em>of</em> <em>multiple</em> <em>linear</em> <em>regression</em> <em>(Test</em> <em>F)</em> <em>and</em> <em>test</em> <em>the</em> <em>significance</em> <em>of</em> <em>multiple</em> <em>linear</em> <em>regression</em> <em>coefficients</em> <em>&nbsp;</em><em>(t</em> <em>test),</em> <em>in</em> <em>addition</em> <em>to</em> <em>the</em> <em>calculation</em> <em>of</em> <em>relative</em> <em>donations</em> <em>and</em> <em>effective</em> <em>contributions.</em> <em>The</em> <em>results</em> <em>showed</em> <em>that</em> <em>1)</em> <em>Learning</em> <em>activity</em> <em>did</em> <em>not</em> <em>have</em> <em>a</em> <em>significant</em> <em>influence</em> <em>on</em> <em>the</em> <em>learning</em> <em>achievement</em> <em>of</em> <em>Accounting</em> <em>Education</em> <em>students</em> <em>of</em> <em>Banten</em> <em>Jaya</em> <em>Faculty</em> <em>of</em> <em>Teacher</em> <em>Training</em> <em>and</em> <em>Education</em> <em>which</em> <em>was</em> <em>indicated</em> <em>by</em> <em>table&gt;</em> <em>thitung</em> <em>(1,667&gt;</em> <em>0,858).</em> <em>2)</em> <em>Emotional</em> <em>Intelligence</em> <em>does</em> <em>not</em> <em>have</em> <em>a</em> <em>significant</em> <em>influence</em> <em>on</em> <em>the</em> <em>learning</em> <em>achievement</em> <em>of</em> <em>Accounting</em> <em>Education</em> <em>students</em> <em>of</em> <em>Banten</em> <em>Jaya</em> <em>Faculty</em> <em>of</em> <em>Teacher</em> <em>Training</em> <em>and</em> <em>Education</em> <em>which</em> <em>is</em> <em>indicated</em> <em>by</em> <em>table&gt;</em> <em>thitung</em> <em>(1.667&gt;</em> <em>0.61)</em> <em>3)</em> <em>Learning</em> <em>activity</em> <em>and</em> <em>intelligence</em> <em>together</em> <em>do</em> <em>not</em> <em>significantly</em> <em>influence</em> <em>the</em> <em>learning</em> <em>achievement</em> <em>of</em> <em>FKIP</em> <em>Accounting</em> <em>education</em> <em>students</em> <em>Banten</em> <em>Jaya</em> <em>University.</em> <em>Based</em> <em>on</em> <em>the</em> <em>F</em> <em>test,</em> <em>it</em> <em>is</em> <em>known</em> <em>that</em> <em>H0</em> <em>received</em> <em>by</em> <em>Ha</em> <em>is</em> <em>rejected</em> <em>because</em> <em>Fcount&gt;</em> <em>Ftable</em> <em>(0.594&gt;</em> <em>0.311)</em> <em>and</em> <em>the</em> <em>significance</em> <em>of</em> <em>significance</em> <em>of</em> <em>0.05.</em> <em>That</em> <em>is</em> <em>0.555.</em> <em>4)</em> <em>Student</em> <em>learning</em> <em>activeness</em> <em>variables</em> <em>contribute</em> <em>6.25%</em> <em>effectively,</em> <em>students</em> <em>emotional</em> <em>intelligence</em> <em>variable</em> <em>contributes</em> <em>6.1%</em> <em>effectively</em> <em>so</em> <em>the</em> <em>total</em> <em>contribution</em> <em>is</em> <em>12.35%,</em> <em>while</em> <em>the</em> <em>remaining</em> <em>87.65%</em> <em>is</em> <em>influenced</em> <em>by</em> <em>other</em> <em>variables</em> <em>not</em> <em>examined.</em></p> Nely Hartika, Farach Mariana ##submission.copyrightStatement## Nely.hartika@gmail.com http://ejournal.lppm-unbaja.ac.id/index.php/progress/article/view/490 Mon, 11 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0000 PENGARUH PELAYANAN AKADEMIK TERHADAP TINGKAT KEPUASAN MAHASISWA UNIVERSITAS BANTEN JAYA (UNBAJA) http://ejournal.lppm-unbaja.ac.id/index.php/progress/article/view/494 <p><em>This research was conducted at University Banten Jaya (UNBAJA). The purpose of this research were: 1) to know how the quality of academic service. 2) to know how student satisfaction. 3) to know how the influence of academic service to the level of student satisfaction. In this research data collection technique was spreading&nbsp; questionnaires for 322 respondents(19,5%)&nbsp; of 1.649 populations. The method used in this research was descriptive. The Data analysis included, validity test, reliability test, classical assumption test (residual normality, heteroscedasticity, linearity), correlation analysis, simple linear regression analysis, significance test (f test, t test,coefficient of determination). The results were data analysis has been done obtained results where the academic services included into the category of "High Service Quality" (62,28%). &nbsp;Meanwhile, the level of student satisfaction "Satisfied" category (0,81). And the influence of academic service to the level of student satisfaction was 0,678, it meant that the influence of Academic Service (X) on Student Satisfaction Level was 67,80% and 32,2% was influenced by other variable. Thus it could be concluded that there was significant influence between the academic service on the level of student satisfaction.</em></p> Khristina Sri Prihatin, Yohana Selvia Dewi ##submission.copyrightStatement## khristinasriprihatin@unbaja.ac.id http://ejournal.lppm-unbaja.ac.id/index.php/progress/article/view/494 Fri, 08 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0000