Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
3.892
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pendidikan Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika SoLuSi ( Tersohor Luas dan Berisi ) Journal on Mathematics Education (JME) Jurnal S2 Pendidikan Matematika Journal on Mathematics Education (JME) JURNAL JPSD (Jurnal Pendidikan Sekolah Dasar) Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education JIPM (Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Matematika) Al-Jabar : Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika QALAMUNA: Jurnal Pendidikan, Sosial, dan Agama Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Indonesian Journal of Science and Mathematics Education JTAM (Jurnal Teori dan Aplikasi Matematika) International Journal on Emerging Mathematics Education Jurnal Cendekia : Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika Jurnal Basicedu Journal of Educational Research and Evaluation International Journal of Elementary Education M A T H L I N E : Jurnal Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika jurnal dikdas bantara Nusantara: Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia Jurnal Basicedu Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Terapan Universitas Jambi Mamangan Social Science Journal International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (IJMME) JRAMathEdu (Journal of Research and Advances in Mathematics Education) Proceeding International Conference on Mathematics and Learning Research Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif Journal on Mathematics Education
Budi Usodo
Universitas Negeri Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia
Arts Humanities Education Engineering Health Professions Industrial & Manufacturing Engineering Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Mathematics Public Health Social Sciences Other

Published : 152 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 152 Documents
Search

 1   2   3   4   5 
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL JIGSAW SNOWBALL DRILLING DAN PEER TUTORING SNOWBALL DRILLING PADA MATERI POKOK TABUNG, KERUCUT, DAN BOLA DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA P, Nelly Indriastuti; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 1 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (326.266 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The aims of this research were to determine: (1) which results better mathematics learning achievement between students who were taught by using jigsaw snowball drilling, peer tutoring snowball drilling, or direct instruction, (2) which has better mathematics learning achievement between students with visual learning styles, auditory, or kinesthetic, (3). at each of the learning model, which one has better mathematics learning achievement between student with visual learning style, auditory, or kinesthetic, (4). at each learning style, which one results better mathematics learning achievement between students who were taught by using jigsaw snowball drilling, peer tutoring snowball drilling or direct instruction. This study was a quasi experimental research with 3x3 factorial designs. The population in this study was all students of IX graders of SMPN in Blora in the academic year of 2013/2014. Stratified cluster random sampling was used to select three schools namely SMPN 2 Cepu, SMPN 1 Kedungtuban, and SMPN 1 Cepu. The hypotheses testing used unbalanced two ways ANOVA. Based on the research conducted, it can be concluded as follows. (1) Students who were taught by using jigsaw snowball drilling have better learning achievement than those who were taught by using peer tutoring snowball drilling and direct learning. While the learning achievement of students who were taught by using peer tutoring snowball drilling was better than those who were taught by using direct instruction. (2) Mathematics achievement of auditory students was better than visual and kinesthetic students have. Visual students result mathematics achievement which was better than kinesthetic students. (3) In the jigsaw snowball drilling model, there was no difference in learning achievement in each criterion of student’s learning styles (visual, auditory, and kinesthetic). In the peer tutoring snowball drilling models, students mathematics achievement which have auditory learning style better than students with visual and kinesthetic learning style; there was no difference in learning achievement between student who have visual and kinesthetic learning styles. In the direct instruction, there was no difference in learning achievement between student who have visual and auditory learning styles; there was no difference in learning achievement between student who have visual and kinesthetic learning styles; and students mathematics achievement which have auditory learning style better than students with kinesthetic learning style. (4) For the students who have visual learning style, jigsaw snowball drilling results better learning achievement than peer tutoring snowball drilling and direct instruction; there was no difference learning achievement in peer tutoring snowball drilling and direct instruction. For the students who have auditory learning style, there was no difference learning achievement in jigsaw snowball drilling and peer tutoring snowball drilling; jigsaw snowball drilling and peer tutoring snowball drilling result better learning achievement than direct instruction. For the students who have kinesthetic learning style, there was no difference learning achievement in peer tutoring snowball drilling and direct instruction. Jigsaw snowball drilling and peer tutoring snowball drilling result better learning achievement than direct instruction.Keywords: Jigsaw Snowball Drilling, Peer Tutoring Snowball Drilling, Direct Instruction, Student Learning Styles, and Mathematics Learning Achievement.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER DENGAN MAKE A MATCH (NHT MM) DAN NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER DENGAN BAMBOO DANCING (NHT BD) DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN INTERPERSONAL Dewi, Arianti Puspita; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 2 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (263.739 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The purposes of this research were to determine: (1) which students mathematics achievement would be better, student  given NHT MM, NHT BD, or direct learning model, (2) which students mathematics achievement would be better, student with interpersonal intelligence of high, medium or low, (3) which students mathematics achievement would be better, student with interpersonal intelligence of high, medium, or low on each learning model, (4) which student mathematics achievement would be better, student given NHT MM, NHT BD, or direct learning model in each interpersonal intelligence. The instruments were used mathematics achievement test and questionnaire of student’s interpersonal intelligence. The data was analyzed using two ANOVA ways then followed by multiple comparisson tests with using Scheffe’ method. Concluded that: (1) NHT MM model has better mathematics achievement than NHT BD model and direct learning model, while NHT BD model has better mathematics achievement than direct learning model, (2) the students with high interpersonal intelligence has better mathematics achievement than the medium and low interpersonal intelligence students, while the student with medium interpersonal intelligence has better mathematics achievement than the low interpersonal intelligence students, (3) for NHT MM, mathematics achievement of students with high interpersonal intelligence was as good as medium and low interpersonal intelligence, however the mathematics achievement of the students with high interpersonal intelligence were better than the students with low interpersonal intelligence; for NHTBD, the mathematics achievement of students with high intelligence were better than medium and low intelligence, and the mathematics achievement of students with medium intelligence was good as low intelligence; for direct learning, the mathematics achievement of students with high intelligence was better than medium and low intelligence, and the mathematics achievement of students with medium intelligence was good as low intelligence, (4) the students with high, medium, and low interpersonal intelligence have the same achievement of mathematics for the models of NHTMM, NHTBD, and direct learning; for medium and low interpersonal intelligence, the students mathematics achievement treated by NHTMM was better than students treated by NHTBD and direct learning model.Keywords: Numbered Heads Together, Make a Match, Bamboo Dancing, interpersonal intelligence, mathematics achievement.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN GI DENGAN PENDEKATAN QL PADA PECAHAN TERHADAP PRESTASI BELAJAR MATEMATIKA DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR DAN KREATIVITAS SISWA Khasanah, Binti Anisaul; Budiyono, Budiyono; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 2 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (367.544 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: This research aims to know the different effect among learning used Group Investigation with Quantum Learning approach (GI-QL), Group Investigation (GI), and direct learning  models. This research was quasi experimental research with factorial design of 3x3x2. The population of this research was the seventh grade students of State Junior High School of District Pringsewu in The Academic Year 2013/2014. The sampling technique used was stratified cluster random sampling. The data analysis used a three way analysis of variance with different cell at significance levels 0.05. The results of this research was as follows: (1) learning used GI-QL results better learning achievement than GI and direct learning models do, and GI results better learning achievement than direct learning models does, (2.a) at learning used GI-QL, kinesthetic, auditory, and visual learners have the same learning achievement; at learning used GI, visual learners have better  learning achievement than auditory, and kinesthetic and auditory learners have the same learning achievement; whereas at learning used direct learning models, kinesthetic learners have better  learning achievement than visual and kinesthetic learners, and visual and kinesthetic learners have the same learning achievement, (2.b) for kinesthetic and auditory learners, GI-QL results better learning achievement than GI and direct learning models do, and GI and direct learning models result the same learning achievement; and for visual learners, GI-QL and GI result the same learning achievement but better than direct learning models, and GI results better learning achievement than direct learning models does, (3.a) at each of learning models, students with high learning creativity have better learning achievement than low learning creativity, (3.b) at each of learning creativity categories, GI-QL results better learning achievement than GI and direct learning models do, and GI results better learning achievement than direct learning models does, (4.a) at each of learning models with each of learning styles, students with high learning creativity have better learning achievement than low learning creativity, (4.b) at each of learning models with each of learning creativity, visual learners have the same learning achievement with kinesthetic learners but it better  than auditory learners, and auditory learners have better learning achievement than kinesthetic learners, (4.c) at each of learning styles with each of learning creativity, GI-QL results better learning achievement than GI and direct learning models, and GI results better learning achievement than direct learning models.Keywords: Group Investigation, Quantum Learning, Direct Learning, Learning Style, Learning Creativity. 
PENGARUH MODEL PROBLEM POSING SETTING KOOPERATIF TERHADAP PRESTASI DAN MINAT BELAJAR MATEMATIKA SISWA KELAS X SMA DI KABUPATEN MERAUKE DITINJAU DARI GAYA KOGNITIF SISWA Tri Winihati, Irene Endah; Budiyono, Budiyono; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 4 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (343.871 KB)

Abstract

Abstract:  The aim of the research was to determine the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement and learning interest viewed from the student cognitive style. The learning models compared were conventional model, the setting cooperative learning model of Problem posing, and Problem Posing model. The type of the research was a quasi-experimental research. The population were the students of Senior High School in Merauke regency on academic year 2013/2014. The size of the sample was 213 students consisted of 71 students in control group, 71 students in the first experimental group and 71 students in the second experimental group. The instruments used were mathematics achievement test, quesioner, and Group Embedded Figure Test (GEFT). The data was analyzed using multivariate analysis of variance. The conclusions of the research were as follows.  (1) Both  the setting cooperative learning model of Problem Posing and Problem Posing learning model result in a better learning achievement than the conventional learning model, and the setting cooperative learning model of Problem Posing result in a better learning achievement than the Problem Posing learning model. (2) The conventional learning model, the setting cooperative learning model of Problem Posing, and Problem Posing learning model results in the same learning interest. (3) The   field independent students have a better learning achievement than the field dependent students. (4) The field independent students have a better learning interest  than the  field dependent students. (5) For the field dependent students, the setting cooperatif learning model of Problem Posing gives  better learning achievement than the Problem Posing model, and Problem Posing learning model gives better learning achievement than the conventional learning model, and the setting cooperative learning model of Problem Posing gives the same learning achievement with the Problem Posing model.  For the field independent students, the setting cooperative learning model of Problem Posing and the Problem Posing model gives  better learning achievement than the conventional learning model. (6) For the field dependent students, each learning models gives the same learning interest. For the field independent  students, each learning models gives the same learning interest.Keywords: Problem Posing,Setting cooperative, Learning achievement, learning interest, cognitive style.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DENGAN GUIDED NOTE TAKING (GNT) PADA MATERI PERSAMAAN GARIS LURUS DITINJAU DARI KEMAMPUAN BEKERJA SAMA SISWA KELAS VIII SMP/MTs NEGERI DI KOTA SURAKARTA TAHUN PELAJARAN 2013/2014 Anggraini, Nindia Elisie; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 4 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (265.859 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The objectives of this research were to investigate: (1) which of the TPS-GNT learning model, the TPS learning model, and the direct learning model results in a better mathematics learning achievement; (2) which of the students with high, mediun, and low team work have a better mathematics learning achievement; and (3) which of team work of the students result in a better learning achievement for each learning models; and (4) which of the TPS-GNT, TPS and direct learning models result in a better learning achievement for each level of team work of the students.This research used the quasi-experimental method. The population of this research was all students of the junior secondary schools in Surakarta in the academic year of 2013/2014. The samples of this research consisted of 288 students who were divided into three experiment groups. The three groups consisted of group 1, group 2, and group 3. Both of group 1 and group 2 consisted of 193 students whereas group 3 consisted of 95 students. The data of this research were gathered from test of learning achievement in mathematics, questionnaire, and documentation. The data were then analyzed by using umbalanced Two-way Analysis of Variance. According to the research results, it can be concluded: (1) the learning model of Modified TPS was better than that of the TPS and direct learning models while the learning model of TPS was better than the direct learning model; (2) the students with high team work had a better learning achievement than those with medium and low team work while the students with medium team work was better than the low team work; and (3) in each team work, student with high team work, medium team work, and low team work,  the mathematics learning achievement of the students taught with TPS-GNT learning model, TPS learning model, and direct learning model was as good as that of those; (4) in each learning model, the TPS-GNT, TPS and direct learning models, the learning achievement of the student with high team work, medium team work, and low team work, was as good as that of those.Keywords: TPS-GNT learning model, TPS learning model, direct learning model, team work and learning achievement.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE TAPPS DAN TSTS TERHADAP KEMAMPUAN MENYELESAIKAN SOAL CERITA MATEMATIKA DITINJAU DARI TIPE KEPRIBADIAN Astuti, Robia; Budiyono, Budiyono; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 4 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (292.646 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of this research was to determine the effect of learning models toward the ability to solve mathematical word problem viewed from the personality types. This research used the quasi-experimental research method by 3 x 4 factorial design. The population of this research was all of the students in Grade VII of State Junior High School of Tanggamus Regency in the 2013/2014 Academic Year. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique. The samples consisted of 283 students, and they were divided into three groups, 96 students in TAPPS class, 95 students in TSTS class, and 92 students in direct instruction class. The data was analyzed by using analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The results of the research showed as follows. (1) The students exposed to the TAPPS and TSTS learning models have the same ability to solve mathematical word problems. However, the students exposed to the both models have the ability to solve a better mathematical word problems than the students exposed to the direct instructional model. (2) The students with idealist type have the ability to solve a better mathematical word problems than artisan type. However, guardian type, artisan type and rational type, they have the same ability to solve mathematical word problems, as well as guardian type, idealist type and rational type, they also have the same ability to solve mathematical word problems. (3) At group of rational type, the students exposed to the TAPPS learning model have the ability to solve a better mathematical word problems than the students exposed to the direct instructional model. However, the students exposed to the TAPPS and TSTS learning models have the same ability to solve mathematical word problems, and the students exposed to the TSTS and direct instructional models have the same ability to solve mathematical word problem. At group of guardian type, artisan type, and idealist type, all models (TAPPS, TSTS, and direct instructional) have provided the same ability to solve mathematical word problems. (4) In the class that using the cooperative TAPPS learning model, rational type have the ability to solve a better mathematical word problems than guardian type, while artisan type, idealist type, and rational type, they have the same ability to solve mathematical word problems, as well as guardian type, idealist type, and artisan type, they also have the same ability to solve mathematical word problems. In the class that using the cooperative TSTS and direct instuctional models, guardian type, artisan type, idealist type, and rational type, they also have the same ability to solve mathematical word problems.Keywords:  word problem, TAPPS, TSTS, personality type. 
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN THINK TALK WRITE (TTW) DENGAN PENDEKATAN MATEMATIKA REALISTIK (PMR) TERHADAP PRESTASI BELAJAR MATEMATIKA DITINJAU DARI KEMAMPUAN PENALARAN MATEMATIKA DAN KREATIVITAS BELAJAR SISWA SMP SE-KABUPATEN WONOGIRI Utami, Novia Fajar; Budiyono, Budiyono; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 3 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (328.791 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: This aims of the research were to determine: (1) which one that give better achievement, learning with TTW with RMA, TTW, or conventional, (2) which one  that give better achievement, the students having high, medium, or low mathematics reasoning ability, (3) which one that give better achievement, the students having high, medium, or low creativity, (4) in each learning model, which one category of mathematics reasoning ability that give better achievement, the students having high, medium, or low mathematics reasoning ability, (5) in each learning model, which one  that give better achievement, the students having high, medium, or low creativity, (6) in each category of mathematics reasoning ability, which one that give better achievement, the students having high, medium, or low creativity, (7) in each learning model for each category of mathematics reasoning ability, which one that give better achievement better, the students having high, medium, or low creativity. Prior knowledge data are examined by using one-way ANOVA with unbalanced cells. It shows that three classes have balance prior knowledge. Meanwhile, the technique of analyzing the data was three-ways ANOVA with unbalanced cells. The result of research showed that: (1) TTW with  RMA provided better achievement than TTW and conventional, and also TTW provided better achievement than conventional, (2) the students having high and medium mathematics reasoning ability had same achievement, and also than the students having high and medium mathematics reasoning ability had better  achievement than those having low mathematics reasoning ability, (3) the students having high, medium, and low creativity had the same achievement, (4) in each learning model, the students having high and medium reasoning ability had the same achievement, and also than the students having high and medium mathematics reasoning ability had better achievement than those having low mathematics reasoning ability, (5) in each learning model, the students having high, medium, and low creativity had the same achievement, (6) in each category of mathematics reasoning ability, the students having high, medium, and low creativity had the same achievement, (7) in each learning model for each category of mathematics reasoning ability, the students having high, medium, and low creativity had the same achievement.Keywords: Think Talk Write (TTW), Realistic Mathematics Approach (RMA), mathematics reasoning ability, learning creativity, mathematics achievement.
PENGEMBANGAN PERANGKAT PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA BERBAHASA INGGRIS BERDASARKAN TEORI KECERDASAN MAJEMUK (MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES) PADA MATERI BALOK DAN KUBUS UNTUK KELAS VIII SMP Wicaksono, Dian Panji; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 5 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (290.137 KB)

Abstract

Abstract : This research aimed to produce and describe the process and the result of the development of Mathematics learning set in English, based on the multiple intelligences theory on topic of cuboid and cube. This research was conducted in seventh grade of SMPN 1 Ngadirojo, SMP N 3 Ngadirojo, and SMPN 2 Ngadirojo that each of those has 32 students. This research was developmental study, i.e. the development of learning set based on the multiple intelligences theory as mentioned above. The development model that’s used refers to the Tjeerd Plomp one. Based on the conducted research, there were some conclusions as the followings (1) The process of the development of Mathematics learning set in English, based on the multiple intelligence theory: (a) The initial investigation phase obtained supporting theories for learning set development such as multiple intelligence theory by Gardner, Armstrong, and Bellanca, 2013 curriculum investigation that mandates to involve the multiple intelligences in Mathematics learning, students’ condition investigation that have various dominant intelligent. (b) The design phase obtained the developed learning set, i.e. lesson plan, student text book, student work sheet, and assessment sheet arranged in English, research instrument plan that consists of learning equipment validation sheet, observation sheet of learning implementation, observation sheet of students’ multiple intelligences involvement activity, and students’ response questionnaire. (c) On the realization phase, it’s arranged the learning set and research instrument. (d) On the test, evaluation, and revision phase, the learning set and limited trial were validated. (2) The result of development of Mathematics learning set in English, based on multiple intelligences theory: (a) The validity of learning set on lesson plan was 3.96, student text book 3.72, student work sheet 4.02, and assessment sheet 3.86. (b) The developed learning set could be used with a little revision and the average of learning implementation was 4.22. (c) This developed learning set could be said that it has been effective because the students’ multiple intelligences involvement activity reached 89,46% and the students’ responses were positive. Although the classical thoroughness was not achieved because only 35.42% of students met the minimal achievement criteria.Keywords : Mathematics Learning Set in English Based, Multiple  Intelligences, cube and  cuboid.      
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER (NHT) DAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DENGAN CONTEXTUAL TEACHING AND LEARNING (CTL) PADA MATERI PERSAMAAN DAN PERTIDAKSAMAAN LINEAR SATU VARIABEL DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN EMOSIONAL SISWA Winata, Rahmat; Budiyono, Budiyono; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 5 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (227.228 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: This research aimed to find out: (1) Which one give better mathematics’ learning achievement, learning model of NHT with CTL, TPS with CTL or direct learning, (2) Which one have better mathematics’ learning achievement, students who have high, medium or low. (3) On each learning model, which one give better achievement on each emotional intelligence. (4) On each level of emotional intelligence, which one give better mathematics’ learning achievement, learning model of NHT with CTL, TPS with CTL or direct learning. This research was the quasi-experimental research with 3×3 factorial design. The population of research was all students of Junior High School (SMP) in Karanganyar. The samples were 308 students; consist of 104 students in the first experimental class, 104 in the second experimental class, and 100 students in control class. The technique of analyzing the data was two-ways ANOVA with unbalanced cells. The result of research showed as follows. (1) The NHT with CTL given learning achievement as good as the TPS with CTL. NHT and TPS with CTL provided better learning achievement than the direct learning, (2) The students with high emotional intelligence had better learning achievement than those with medium and low emotional intelligence. The students with medium emotional intelligence had better learning achievement than did those with low emotional intelligence, (3) Students taught by using NHT and TPS with CTL, students with high emotional intelligence had learning achievement as good as the medium emotional intelligence. The students with high emotional intelligence had better learning achievement than the students with low emotional intelligence. The students with medium emotional intelligence had learning achievement as good as the students with low emotional intelligence. Students taught by using direct learning had equal learning achievement in each level of emotional intelligence, (4) Students with high emotional intelligence taught by using the NHT with CTL had learning achievement as good as the TPS with CTL. Students with high emotional intelligence taught by using the NHT and TPS with CTL had better learning achievement than the direct learning. Students with medium and low emotional intelligence had equal learning achievement in each learning model.Keywords: NHT with CTL, TPS with CTL, learning achievement, emotional intelligence.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE NUMBERED HEAD TOGETHER (NHT) DENGAN ASSESSMENT FOR LEARNING (AfL) MELALUI PENILAIAN TEMAN SEJAWAT PADA MATERI PERSAMAAN GARIS DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS BELAJAR MATEMATIKA SISWA MTsN DI KABUPATEN SRAGEN Muntasyir, Sholeh; Budiyono, Budiyono; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 7 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (255.754 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: This research is aimed to view: (1) which gives a better learning achievement,  learning Numbered Head Together (NHT) with the AfL through peer assessment, NHT or direct learning, (2) which gives better achievement, low, medium or high level creativity in mathematics learning, (3) which has better mathematics learning achievement, student having low, medium or high learning creativity on each learning model, (4) which learning model gives better achievement in learning mathematics, learning model Numbered Head Together (NHT) with the AfL through peer assessment, learning models Numbered Head Together (NHT) or direct learning model on each student’s creativity level. This research was a quasi-experimental research with 3x3 factorial design. The study population was all students MTsN in Sragen. The sampling technique used a stratified cluster random sampling. The samples were 294 students, consisted of 95 students in the first experimental class, 100 students in the second experimental class and 99 students in the control class. Data collected through mathematics achievement tests and questionnaires of study mathematics creativity. Hypothesis testing used two- way analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The results show as follows. (1) The NHT with the AfL through peer assessment model provide a better learning performance than the NHT and direct learning model. The NHT model provide a better learning performance than the direct learning model. (2) Students with a high level learning creativity have a better achievement than students who have medium and low creativity. Students with medium and low level creativity gain the same learning achievement. (3) In the NHT learning model with the AfL through peer assessment, students with a high level creativity gain better learning achievement than students with medium learning creativity, but when compared with students who have low learning creativity get the same academic achievement. While using NHT  model and direct learning, students with high, medium and low creativity get the same learning achievement. (4) At the high level of creativity,  NHT with the AfL through peer assessment model gived a better performance than the NHT and direct learning, NHT and direct learning models provide the same learning performance. Students having medium and low level of creativity provide the same learning achievement in each learning models.Keywords : NHT, AfL, peer assessment,  creativity in learning.
Co-Authors A.A. Ketut Agung Cahyawan W Adi Nurcahyo Adwitiya Sarwahita, Salsabila Agnes Reswari Ingkansari Ahmad, Ahmad Ahmad, Ahmad Al Firdaus, Nabila Uristu Andhika, Niken Dwi Ardelia, Nadia Rizki Ardiyanto, David Ardiyanto, David Arianti Puspita Dewi Aritsya Imswatama Asrowi Asrowi Astri Wahyuni Asy’ari Asy’ari Asy’ari, Asy’ari Auliya, Anisa Rima Binti Anisaul Khasanah Brilliyanti, Fanny Brilliyanti, Fanny Budiyono Budiyono Budiyono, Budiyono Budiyono, Budiyono Cahyani, Apri Winar Chrisnawati, Henny Ekana Chrisnawati, Henny Ekana Chumdari Chumdari, Chumdari Dewi Retno Sari Saputro, Dewi Retno Dian Devita Yohanie Yohanie Dian Dwi Astutik, Dian Dwi Dian N Safitri Dian Panji Wicaksono Dian Ratna Puspananda Dwi A, Yuridis Madyarsa Dwi A, Yuridis Madyarsa E.P.U, Moertiningsih Edwin Latif Hardiyanto Eka Nur Azizah Endang Hariyati Ersam Mahendrawan Fahimah Andini Farah Heniati Santosa, Farah Heniati Farida Nurhasanah Ferri Ardianzah Fida Rahmantika Hadi, Fida Rahmantika Fitriana, Laila Fuany, Anggun Gunarhadi Gunarhadi, Gunarhadi Haniah, Wahyu Nur Harjati, Juliana Kristin Hendriyanto, Agus Henny Ekana Chrisnawati Heribertus Soegiyanto, Heribertus Hidayat Bahktiar, Hidayat Hidayatulloh Hidayatulloh Iffah, Rona Dhiya Layli Ilham Rais A Imam Sujadi Ira Kurniawati Irene Endah Tri Winihati Isnaeni Umi Machromah Isnandar Iswanti, Partia Juniarto, Suci Juniati Juniati Karina Pramitasari, Karina Kartikaningtyas, Nafiqoh Elsa Kristiani, Theresia Kurniawati, Ira Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo Kuswardi, Yemi Kuswardi, Yemi Labiba Zahra, Labiba Lingga Nico Pradana Maghfiroh Yanuarti Manora, Yupi Ayu Maratu Shalikhah, Maratu Mardiyana Mardiyana Mardiyana, Mardiyana Maullina, Eka Siti Mishbahul Huda, Mishbahul Mulyaningrum Lestari, Mulyaningrum Munawaroh Munawaroh Munzayanah, Nurul Murdoko, Yustinus Nada, Yusrina Qotrun Nahdiya, Nikmah Alfi Nansiana, Millenia Nadhea Nelly Indriastuti P Nindia Elisie Anggraini Nok Yeni Heryaningsih, Nok Yeni Novia Dwi Rahmawati Novia Fajar Utami Nugrohorini, Parwo Nunung Juwariah, Nunung Nur Anida Laila Nurlaily, Vivi Astuti Nurlaily, Vivi Astuti NURUL AZIZAH Nuryani Destiningsih, Nuryani Nyoto Nyoto, Nyoto Ony Syaiful Rizal, Ony Syaiful Paryatun, Suji Paryatun, Suji Permataari, Desty Ratna Pinilih, Anggoro Canggih Pramesthi, Getut Pramesti, Getut Pramudya, Ikrar Puput Suriyah Purnama, Agung Eka Purwaningsih, Tri Purwaningsih, Tri Rachmawati, Intan Rahayu, Heni Septi Rahayu, Nastiti Rahmat Winata Rahmawati, Retno Dwi Putri Rany Widyastuti Ratna Herawati Ratnasari Ratnasari Reka Pramukti, Reka Retnowati, Evi Riswandha, Septian Henry Rivia J, Hefin Dwi Riyadi . Riyadi Riyadi Rizqona Maharani, Rizqona Robia Astuti S Siswanto Sa'idah, Ulya Safitri, Rini Dewi Saki, Saki Salistiyani, Salistiyani Sandhy Prasetyo Tito Kurniawan, Sandhy Prasetyo Santosa, Eka Budhi Sarnoko Sarnoko, Sarnoko Sasongko, Anggi Setiaputra, Felix Indra Sholeh Muntasyir Sigit Pamungkas Siswanto Sri Adiningsih Sri Indayani, Sri Sri Subanti Sri Yamtinah Sudiyanto Sujadi, Imam Suryanto, Suryanto Susilawati, Dyah Sutopo Sutopo Sutopo, Sutopo Sutrisno Sutrisno Syarifah, Triana Jamilatus Tien Syarifah Hafidhah, Tien Syarifah Tri Atmojo Kusmayadi Tri Atmojo Kusmayadi Triyanto, Triyanto Tuti, Dewi Setyas Umi Fadlilah, Umi Veva, Ervina Yulias Vivi Fenty Anggraeny Wahartojo, Sri Wahyu Kusumaningtyas Wicaksana, Hafid Wicaksana, Hafid Wulandari, Lina Yemi Kuswardi, Yemi Yolan Kusumaningtyas, Yolan