cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
-
Contact Email
-
Phone
-
Journal Mail Official
-
Editorial Address
-
Location
Kota surakarta,
Jawa tengah
INDONESIA
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika
Published by Universitas Sebelas Maret
ISSN : -     EISSN : -     DOI : -
Core Subject : Education,
Mathematics
Arjuna Subject : -
Articles 347 Documents
 9   10   11   12   13 
EKSPERIMENTASI PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA DENGAN MENGGUNAKAN MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE NHT DAN TIPE JIGSAW PADA POKOK BAHASAN TRIGONOMETRI KELAS XI-IPA SMA SE-KABUPATEN KUDUS DITINJAU DARI MOTIVASI BELAJAR PESERTA DIDIK TAHUN PELAJARAN 2013/2014 Arsa’ad Kurniadi; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Riyadi Riyadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 7 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Abstract: The objectives of this research were to determine: (1) which produces better mathematics learning achievement, NHT, Jigsaw, or conventional learning model, (2) which has better mathematics learning achievement, the students with high, medium or low learning motivation, (3) on each learning model, which provide mathematics learning achievement better, the student with high, medium or low learning motivation, (4) on each level of student mathematics learning motivation, which provide learning achievement better, NHT, Jigsaw, or conventional learning model. This research was quasi experimental research with factorial design 3 x 3. The research population was all XI science grade students of senior high school in Kudus regency in academic year 2013/2014. The sampling technique of this research was done by stratified cluster random sampling. The techniques of data collection by using test, questionnaire, and documentation. Hypothesis testing used two way analysis of variance with the unbalanced cells. The results of the research were as follows: (1) Jigsaw learning model produces better learning achievement than NHT and conventional learning model. NHT learning model show learning achievement as good as conventional learning model. (2) The students who have high learning motivation have a better academic achievement than the students who have medium and low learning motivation. The students with medium learning motivation have learning achievement as good as the students with low learning motivation. (3) In Jigsaw learning model, students who have high learning motivation has academic achievement as good as students who have medium learning motivation, students who have high learning motivation have a better academic achievement than students who have a low learning motivation and students who have medium learning motivation are having academic achievement as good as students who have a low learning motivation. In the NHT learning model and conventional, the students who have high, medium and low learning motivation have equally good learning achievement, (4) In high learning motivation, Jigsaw learning model produces academic achievement better than NHT and conventional learning model. NHT learning model produce academic achievement as good as conventional learning model. In medium and low learning motivation, Jigsaw, NHT and conventional learning model produce equally good learning achievement.Key words:   Jigsaw learning model, NHT learning model, Conventional learning model, Learning Motivation, Mathematics Learning Achievment.
PENGARUH PENERAPAN MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE JIGSAW DENGAN TEKNIK PEMBELAJARAN MAKE A MATCH DAN NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER TERHADAP PRESTASI BELAJAR MATEMATIKA DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN GANDA SISWA Nurani Nurani
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 2 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

ABSTRACTThe objectives of this research are to investigate: (1) which learning model of the J-MAM, J-NHT, and conventional learning results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics; (2) which multiple intelligence of the Logical-Mathematical, Visual-Spatial, and Interpersonal types results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics; (3) in each multiple intelligence, which learning model of the J-MAM, J-NHT, and conventional learning results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics; and (4) in each learning model, which multiple intelligence of the Logical-Mathematical, Visual-Spatial, and interpersonal types results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics. This research used the quasi experimental research method with the factorial design of 3 x 3. Its population was all of the students in Grade XI of State Vocational High Schools in Sragen regency. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified random sampling technique. The data of the research were analyzed by using the unbalanced two-way analysis of variance at the significance level of 5%. The results of the research are as follows: 1) The J-MAM and J-NHT learning models result in the same good learning achievement in Mathematics, but both result in a better learning achievement in Mathematics than the conventional learning model, 2) There are no any differences in the learning achievement in Mathematics of the students with the Logical-Mathematical, Visual-Spatial, and Interpersonal types, 3) In each multiple intelligence type, the J-MAM and J-NHT learning models result in the same good learning achievement in Mathematics, but both result in a better learning achievement in Mathematics than the conventional learning model, 4) In each learning model, the students with Logical-Mathematical, Visual-Spatial, and Interpersonal types have the same learning achievement in Mathematics.Keywords: Jigsaw learning model, conventional learning model, multiple intelligence, learning achievement in Mathematics.
PENGEMBANGAN MODEL INTUITION BASED LEARNING (IBL) DENGAN SCIENTIFIC APPROACH UNTUK MENINGKATKAN HASIL BELAJAR MATEMATIKA SISWA KELAS XI SMA NEGERI 2 SRAGEN Nok Yeni Heryaningsih; Riyadi Riyadi; Budi Usodo
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 9 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of the research was to produce Intuition Based Learning (IBL) model and supporting learning with Scientific Approach in solving problems to increase mathematics students’ achievement that valid, practical and effective. The type of the research was a Research and Development (R&D). The subjects of the research were grade XI MS 6 and XI MS 4 students of SMAN 2 Sragen, Central Java on Academic year 2014/2015. IBL model development process was adopt from Plomp and Borg & Gall development model. They were (1) Collect the informations and studying of theories in Preliminary Investigations Phase, (2) Design of IBL model and supporting learning material (Lesson Plan, Worksheet, Problem sheet, and learning paper) and then design research instruments, (3) Realize the IBL model and supporting learning material that was design to be First Draft, (4) Do validation of the first draft, testing the IBL model in the classroom, and then do revisions, (5) Conduct Focus Group Discussion (FGD) to evaluate the result of IBL model testing in the classroom, then will be revised to the next IBL model testing. The results of the reasearch were produce IBL model and supporting learning material (Lesson Plan, Worksheet, Problem sheet, and learning paper) with scientific approach in solving problems to increase mathematics students’ achievement that valid, practical and effective. These are steps of IBL model in the classroom, (1) Opening with apperception, motivations and build students’ positif perceptions, (2) Students divided into several groups, (3) Teacher explains the material generally, (4) Group discussion with 5M activity (based on Scientific approach), (5) Exercise to solve open ended problem individually with steps that could appear students’ intuition: Preparations, Inkubation, Ilumination and Verification, (6) Closure with review of students have learned or giving homework.Keywords: Development of model, Learning model, intuition, scientific approach, students’ achievement.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN NESTED DAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DENGAN PENDEKATAN KONTEKSTUAL PADA MATERI POKOK BANGUN RUANG SISI DATAR DITINJAU DARI KECEMASAN BELAJAR MATEMATIKA SISWA KELAS VIII MTs PONOROGO TAHUN PELAJARAN 2013/2014 Hefin Dwi Rivia J; Tri Atmojo Kusmayadi; Budi Usodo
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 8 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Abstract: The objectives of this study were to know: (1) which one gave students a better learning achievement, Nested learning model and Think Pair Share with Contextual, or Direct Instruction, (2) which one has better learning achievement in mathematics, students who have the level of low anxiety, medium one, or high one. (3) which level of anxiety in learning mathematics gave better learning achievements using Nested learning model and Think Pair Share with Contextual approach, or Direct Instruction, (4) which learning model (Nested and Think Pair Share with Contextual approach, or Direct Instruction) gave better learning achievement in mathematics toward students with high, medium or low anxiety. It was a quasi-experimental study using two independent variables (model of learning and the anxiety of learning mathematics) and one dependent variable (learning achievement of mathematics). The instruments used to collect the data were documentation, testing, and questionnaires. Two-way ANOVA with unequal cell was used to analyze the data. The sample-taking was done using Stratified Cluster Random Sampling. The results of the research were: (1) the learning achievement in Nested learning model is better than learning achievement in Think Pair Share learning model and Direct Instruction, the learning achievement in Think Pair Share learning model is better than Direct Instruction one, (2) students with low anxiety have better learning achievement in mathematics than students with medium and high anxiety, and the ones having medium anxiety have better learning achievement in mathematics than the ones with high anxiety, (3) in Nested, Think Pair Share, and Direct Instruction learning model, the learning achievement in mathematics toward low anxiety students is better than medium and high anxiety students and medium anxiety students learning is better than high anxiety, and (4) in low, medium, and high anxiety students, the learning achievement in Nested learning model is better than Think Pair Share model and Direct Instruction, Think Pair Share model is better than Direct Instruction one.Keywords: Nested, Think Pair Share, Direct Instruction, Anxiety. 
PROSES BERPIKIR SISWA SMA DALAM PENYELESAIAN MASALAH APLIKASI TURUNAN FUNGSI DITINJAU DARI TIPE KEPRIBADIAN TIPOLOGI HIPPOCRATES-GALENUS Rina Agustina; Imam Sujadi; Pangadi Pangadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 4 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Abstract:The aims of the research is to describe the thinking process at senior high school students in solving the application problems of the derivative function viewed from personality type choleric, sanguine, melancholies, and phlegmatic. The research was a descriptive qualitative. The subjects of the research was students of class XII Senior High School 1 Surakarta consist of one student for each personality types. The prosedure of selecting the subjects used purposive sampling. The data of the research was collected by using think aloud method. The validity of the data used was triangulation. Technique analyzing of the data were: (1) classifying the data into three categories: (a) understanding the information, (b) solving the problems, (c) convincing the answer, and then reducing the data, (2) presenting the data, and (3) concluding the data in each categories. The results of the research showed that thinking process for, (1) choleric student: (a) reading and creating an image, understanding information and question, (b) devising solution, connecting the first equation with the planned solution, solving the problem and only using one way solution, (c) substituting the answers into the first equation and determining maximum value of the function, (2) sanguine student: (a) reading and looking, then creating an image, understanding information although having difficulties and understanding question, (b) devising solution, connecting the first equation with the planned solution, solving the problem although having difficulties and using the other solution, (c) substituting the answers into the first equation and adjusting the answers with the problem in question, (3) melancholies student: (a) reading repeatedly, then creating an image, understanding information although having difficulties and understanding question, (b) devising solution, connecting the first equation with the planned solution although having difficulties, solving the problem and using the other solution (c) determining maximum value of the function, (4) phlegmatic student: (a) looking and then creating an image, understanding information and question, (b) devising solution, connecting the first equation with the planned solution although having difficulties, solving the problem and only using one way solution, (c) looking back at the anwers and adjusting with the actual event.Keywords: thinking process, problem solving, personality type Typology Hippocrates-Galenus
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE TEAMS GAMES TOURNAMENTS DAN TEAM ASSISTED INDIVIDUALIZATION PADA MATERI GARIS DAN SUDUT DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN EMOSIONAL SISWA KELAS VII SMP NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN MAGETAN Pradipta Annurwanda; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Dewi Retno Sari Saputro
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 10 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Abstract: This aim of the research was to know the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement viewed from the student emotional intelligences. The learning model compared were TGT, TAI and direct learning. The type of the research was a quasi-experimental. The population was all of student seventh grade of junior high school in Magetan regency on academic year 2013/2014. The sampling technique by using a stratified cluster random sampling. The size of the sample was 252 students with 85 students as experimental class I, 86 students as experimental class II, 81 students as control class. The data collections were taken by document, questionnaire and test method. Hypothesis testing was performed by using an unbalanced two way analysis of variance. The conclusions of  the research were as follows: (1) TGT learning model give better mathematics achievement than TAI and direct learning model, TAI learning model give an equal mathematics achievement to direct learning model, (2) the high level emotional intelligence students have an equal mathematics achievement to the middle level emotional intelligence students, the high level emotional intelligence students have better mathematics achievement than the low level emotional intelligence students, the middle level emotional intelligence students have better mathematics achievement than the low level emotional intelligence students, (3) for the high level emotional intelligence students, TGT, TAI and direct learning models give the same mathematics achievement, for the middle level emotional intelligence students, TGT learning model give the same mathematics achievement as TAI and direct learning model, direct learning model give better mathematics achivement than TAI learning model, for the low level emotional intelligence students, TGT learning model give the same mathematics achievement as TAI learning model, TGT learning model give better mathematics achievement than direct learning model, TAI learning model give the same mathematics achievement as direct learning model, (4) on the TGT and TAI learning models, students in each level of emotional intelligence have the same mathematics achievement, for student with direct learning model, the high level emotional intelligence students have the same mathematics achievement as middle and low level emotional intelligence students, the middle level emotional intelligence students have better mathematics achievement than low level emotional intelligence students.Keywords: Teams Games Tournaments, Team Assisted Individualization, direct learning, emotional intelligence.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN TTW DAN NHT PADA MATERI BANGUN RUANG SISI DATAR DITINJAU DARI KEMAMPUAN KOMUNIKASI MATEMATIS SISWA Nurina Kurniasari Rahmawati; Budiyono Budiyono; Dewi Retno Sari S
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 10 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of the research was to find out the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement viewed from the student mathematics communications ability. The learning model compared were TTW (Think Talk Write), NHT (Numbered Head Together) and conventional. The type of the research was a quasi-experimental by 3 12×"> 3 factorial design. The population was the eight grade student of junior high school in Magelang regency on academic year 2013/2014. The sampling tecnique was stratified cluster random sampling. The size of the sampel was 298 students consisted of 100 students in the first experimental group, 99 students in second experimental group and 99 students in control group. The instruments used were mathematics achievement test and mathematics communication ability test. The data was analyzed using unbalanced two-way analysis of variance. The conclusions of the research were as follows. (1) TTW learning model gives better mathematics achievement than NHT and conventional learning model, and NHT learning model gives better mathematics achievement than conventional learning model. (2) The students with high mathematics communication ability have better mathematics achievement than the students with middle or low mathematics communication ability, the students with middle mathematics communication ability have better mathematics achievement than the students with low mathematics communication ability, (3) a. In the students with high and middle mathematics communication ability, TTW,  NHT and conventional learning model give the same mathematics achievement,  b. In the students with low mathematics communication ability, TTW and NHT learning model give the same mathematics achievement, but give better mathematics achievement than conventional learning model, also NHT and conventional learning model give the same mathematics achievement, (4) a. In the TTW and NHT learning model, students with high, middle and low mathematics communication ability have the same mathematics achievement, b. In the conventional learning model, students with high and middle mathematics communication ability have the same mathematics achievement, but have better mathematics achievement than students with low mathematics communication ability, and students with middle and low mathematics communication ability have the same mathematics achievement.Keywords: TTW, NHT, mathematics communication ability, mathematics achievement
EKSPERIMENTASI METODE PEMBELAJARAN PROBLEM POSING DENGAN PENDEKATAN CTL PADA MATERI BANGUN DATAR DITINJAU DARI TINGKAT INTELEGENSI SISWA KELAS VII SMP NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN PURWOREJO TAHUN PELAJARAN 2012/2013 Aritsya Imswatama; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Budi Usodo
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 6 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of the research was to determine the effect of learning methods on mathematics achievement viewed from the student intelligence level. The learning methods compared were problem posing with CTL approach, problem posing and conventional. The type of the research was quasi experimental research. The population was all of students in the seventh grade of Junior High School in Purworejo in the academic year of 2012/2013. The sample of this research was taken by using stratified cluster random sampling. The sample was consisted of 177 students with 90 students in the first experiment class, 95 students in the second experiment class, and 92 students in the control class. The data of  the research were gathered through documentation and test. The result of research showed that: (1) students’ learning achivement by using problem posing learning method with CTL approach was better than students’ learning achivement by using problem posing method and conventional learning, and students’ learning achivement by problem posing learning method was same as conventional learning method, (2) mathematics achievement of students with high intelligence level was better than that of students with medium and low intelligence level, and mathematics achievement of students with medium intelligence level was better than that of students with low intelligence level, (3) in learning by using problem posing learning method with CTL approach, the level of intelligence had the same effect in students’ learning achievement, in learning by using problem posing method, students with high intelligence level had performance as good as the students with medium intelligence level and were better than the students with low intelligence level, in learning by using conventional learning, students with high intelligence level had better learning achivement than students with medium intelligence level and low intelligence level, and learning achievement of students with medium intelligence level was the same as students with low intelligence level, (4) at the level of students’ intelligence with high, medium and low, problem posing learning method with CTL approach, problem posing learning method and conventional method produced the same effect in learning achievement. Keywords: problem posing with CTL aproach, problem posing, learning achievement, intelligence level.
ANALISIS KESALAHAN SISWA DALAM MENYELESAIKAN SOAL CERITA PADA MATERI VOLUME PRISMA DENGAN FONG’S SHCEMATIC MODEL FOR ERROR ANALYSIS DITINJAU DARI GAYA KOGNITIF SISWA Fitri Andika Nurussafa’at; Imam Sujadi; Riyadi Riyadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 2 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Abstract: This study aims to find out students’ error in solving stories problems on prism volume using fong’s shcematic model for error analysis viewed from the students’ cognitive style. This study was conducted in SMP IT Ibnu abbas Klaten in the academic year of 2013/2014. This study is a qualitative study. The technique used in selecting the research subjects was purposive sample. The subjects used in this study were 6 students taken from grade VIII. The result is: (1) the errors experienced by students with field dependent type is more dominant than operational errors, and mathematical themes errors, (2) the errors experienced by students with field independent type is more dominant than language errors, (3) the factors that caused students with field dependent type to make mistakes in solving prism volume word problems based were: the inadvertence on reading the problems, the forgetfulness, in a hurry to finish, the effect of the previous mistakes, and the lack of understanding on the sequence of solving the problems, (4) the factors that caused students with field independent type to make mistakes in solving prism volume problems based were: the assumption that the symbol (=) might be replaced with the symbol (:), the desire to quickly finish the problems, in a hurry in solving the problems, the habit of incomplete problems writing, the effect of the previous mistakes, the lack of the steps mastery of solving the given problems.Keywords: Error analysis, Prism Volume, Fong’s Shcematic Model For Error Analysis, Cognitive style.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE TAI (TEAM ASSISTED INDIVIDUALIZATION) BERBANTU MEDIA PEMBELAJARAN ADOBE FLASH 8.0 PADA MATERI POKOK SEGIEMPAT DITINJAU DARI MOTIVASI BELAJAR SISWA SMP NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN SUKOHARJO TAHUN PELAJARAN 2013/20 Intan Novia Sari; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Sri Subanti
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 1 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Abstract: The aims of this research were to know: (1) which one of the learning model gave a better achievement between of the TAI assisted by adobe flash 8.0, TAI, and conventional; (2) which one of the students with students learning motivation categories had a better achievement between students with high, moderate or low learning motivation; (3) in each the students learning motivation categories, which one of the learning models gave a better achievement in mathematics between TAI assisted by adobe flash 8.0, TAI, or conventional; (4) in each the learning models, which one of the students learning motivation had a better achievement in mathematics between the students with high, moderate, or low students learning motivation.The type of the research was a quasi experimental research method. The population of the research was the seventh class students of State Junior Secondary School at Sukoharjo regency in Academic Year 2013/2014. They were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique. The instruments used to gather the data of the research were test of learning achievement in Mathematics and questionnaire of  the students learning motivation. The data analysis technique used was unbalanced two ways analysis of variance. Based on the data analysis, it was concluded as follows. 1) TAI assisted by adobe flash 8.0 results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics than TAI and conventional, the TAI model results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics than conventional. 2) The students with the high  learning motivation had the same achievement as the students with moderate learning motivation, the students with the moderate learning motivation had the same achievement as the students with low learning motivation and the students with the high learning motivation had a better learning achievement in Mathematics than the students with low learning motivation. 3) In each students learning motivation, the TAI assisted by adobe flash 8.0 results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics than TAI and conventional, the TAI model results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics than conventional. 4) In each learning model, the students with the high  learning motivation had the same achievement as the students with moderate learning motivation, the students with the moderate learning motivation had the same achievement as the students with low learning motivation and the students with the high learning motivation had a better learning achievement in Mathematics than the students with low  learning motivation.Keywords: Team Assisted Individualization model, Adobe Flash 8.0, and students learning motivation.

Page 11 of 35 | Total Record : 347

 9   10   11   12   13 

Filter by Year

2013 2018


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol 5, No 3 (2018): Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 5, No 2 (2018): Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 5, No 1 (2018): Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 5 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 5 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 4 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 4 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 3 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 3 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 2 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 2 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 1 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 1 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 10 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 10 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 9 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 9 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 8 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 8 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 7 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 7 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 6 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 6 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 5 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 5 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 4 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 4 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 3 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 3 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 2 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 2 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 1 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 1 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 10 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 10 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 9 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 9 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 8 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 8 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 7 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 6 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 6 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 5 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 5 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 4 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 4 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 3 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 3 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 2 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 2 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 1 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 1 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 7 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 7 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 6 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 6 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 5 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 5 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 4 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 4 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 3 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 2 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 2 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 1 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika More Issue