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
 12   13   14   15   16 
PROSES BERPIKIR SISWA KELAS VIII SMP NEGERI 25 SURAKARTA DALAM MEMECAHKAN MASALAH MATEMATIKA DITINJAU DARI TIPE KEPRIBADIAN EXTROVERT-INTROVERT PADA MATERI PERSAMAAN GARIS LURUS Permatasari, Nisa; Budiyono, Budiyono; Slamet, Isnandar
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 3 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The objective of this research was to describethe 8th grade students’s thinking process of SMP Negeri 25 Surakarta. The subjects were students of 8th E who has an extrovert and introvert personality. The thinking process was the thought process of assimilation and accommodation in solving mathematical problems based on the type of Krulik and Rudnick on a straight-line equation. The technique of data collection that used was snowball-sampling which the subject stopped when data saturation. Obtained three extrovert students and three introvert students. The validation of data was carried out with time triangulation. The result of research showed that the thinking process of extrovert students in solving mathematical problems based on the type of Krulik and Rudnick step was as follows 1) In read and think step, the used of thinking process was assimilation; 2) In explore and plan step, the used of thinking process was imperfect assimilation; 3) In select a strategy step, the used of thinking process was imperfect assimilation; 4) In find an answer step, the used of thinking process was imperfect assimilation; 5) In reflect and extend step, the used of thinking process was accommodation. The thinking process of introvert students in solving mathematical problems based on the type of Krulik and Rudnick step was as follows: 1) In read and think step, the used of thinking process was assimilation; 2) In explore and plan step, the used of thinking process was assimilation; 3) In select a strategy step, the used of thinking process was imperfect assimilation; 4) In find an answer step, the used of thinking process was assimilation; 5) In reflect and extend step, the used of thinking process was a imperfect assimilation.Keywords: Assimilation and Accommodation, Extrovert and Introvert, Problem Solving. 
EFEKTIVITAS MODEL PEMBELAJARAN TWO STAY TWO STRAY DENGAN TUTOR SEBAYA DALAM PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA PADA MATERI BANGUN DATAR DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN MAJEMUK PESERTA DIDIK KELAS VII SMP NEGERI DI KEBUMEN TAHUN PELAJARAN 2013/2014 Miftachudin Miftachudin; Budiyono Budiyono; Riyadi Riyadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 3 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The objective of this research was to know the effect of the learning models on the learning achievement of quadrangle viewed from the multiple inellegences of the students. The learning models compared were the cooperative learning models of the TSTS type with peer tutor, the cooperative learning models of the TSTS type, and the direct learning models. The kind of research is quasi-experimental research with factorial design 3x3. Population of this research is all students of State Junior High Schools in Kebumen. The sample of this research is 288 students which is 95 students in Experiment I class, 96 students in Experiment II class, and 97 students in controlled class. The hypothesis test uses two ways analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The result of the research shows that: (1) TSTS learning model by peer tutor shows the higher achievement of students than cooperative learning model of TSTS. The cooperative learning model of TSTS results as good as the direct learning model, and TSTS learning model by peer tutor results higher achievement than the direct learning one, (2) students with logic-mathematic linguistic, and interpersonal intelligence have the same achievement among them, (3) at TSTS learning model by peer tutor, TSTS learning model, and direct learning model, students with logic-mathematic, linguistic, and interpersonal intelligence have the same result, (4) at students with logic-mathematic, linguistic, and interpersonal intelligence, TSTS learning model by peer tutor results higher achievement than TSTS cooperative learning model; TSTS cooperative learning model results as good as the result of direct learning model; and TSTS learning model by peer tutor results higher achievement than the direct learning model.Keywords: TSTS learning model by peer tutor, Two Stay Two Stray, achievement, intelligence
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF PEER TUTORING DAN MANDIRI DENGAN E-LEARNING PADA POKOK BAHASAN ALJABAR DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN MAJEMUK Dian N Safitri; Tri Atmojo Kusmayadi; Budi Usodo
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 1 (2014): 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 is providing bettermathematics learning achievement, students taught using cooperative learning peer tutoring, selfdirectedlearning by e-learning or direct learning, (2) which one is having better mathematicslearning achievement, students with interpersonal intelligence, students with intrapersonalintelligence or students with linguistic intelligence, (3) at each learning model, are there anydifference mathematics learning achievement between students with interpersonal intelligence,students with intrapersonal intelligence or students with linguistic intelligence, (4) at each type ofintelligence, are there any difference mathematics learning achievement between students taughtusing cooperative learning peer tutoring, self-directed learning by e-learning or direct learning.This was a quasi experimental research using 3x3 factorial designs. The hypotheses testing usedtwo ways ANOVA with unbalance cell. This research concludes that: (1) students who weretaught using cooperative learning peer tutoring have better mathematics learning achievementthan the students who were taught using self-directed learning by e-learning and students who aretaught using direct instruction, as well as students who were taught using self-directed learningby e-learning have better mathematics learning achievement than the group of students who weretaught using direct instruction, (2) students achievement with the type of interpersonalintelligence are better than the students with the type of intrapersonal intelligence and linguisticintelligence type while the students with the type of linguistic intelligence have bettermathematics learning achievement than the students with the type of intrapersonal intelligence,(3) in the cooperative learning peer tutoring, students with interpersonal intelligence have bettermathematic learning achievement than students with interpersonal and linguistik intelligence,students with linguistic intelligence have better learning achievement than student withintrapersonal intelligence, in the self-directed learning by e-learning, there was no difference inlearning achievement in each type of intelligence, in the direct instruction, students withinterpersonal and linguistic intelligence have better mathematic learning achievement thanstudents with intrapersonal intelligence, (4) for the students who have interpersonal intelligence,cooperative learning peer tutoring produce better mathematics achievement than self-directedlearning by e-learning and direct instruction, for the students who have intrapersonal intelligence,self-directed learning by e-learning produce better mathematics achievement than directinstruction, for the students who have linguistic intelligence, there was no difference in learningachievement in each learning models.Keywords: E-Learning, Peer Tutoring, Intelligence, mathematics learning achievement
AKTIVITAS METAKOGNISI DALAM PEMECAHAN MASALAH MATEMATIKA DITINJAU DARI GENDER SISWA KELAS VII SMP NEGERI 1 NANGGULAN KABUPATEN KULON PROGO Sari, Retno; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Sujadi, Imam
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 5 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: This research was aimed to decribe metacognition activity of male and female students in mathematics problem solving. This research was a qualitative research which used case study method. The subject of the research was 7th students of SMP Negeri 1 Nanggulan. The subject selection criteria was based on students opinion expressing competency either in spoken and written form. The data was collected using think aloud method where the students were asked to express their ideas and questions loudly in mathematical problem solving processes. Then the time triangulation was run to produce a valid data from the research subject. The data analysis was conducted using Miles and Huberman model. The result of research showed : 1) the metacognition activity of the male students are : a) understanding the problems phase : perform activities related to strategic knowledge; b) devising a plan phase : perform activities associated with knowledge about cognitive tasks; c) carrying out the plan phase : perform activities related to strategic knowledge and associated with knowledge about cognitive tasks; d) looking back phase : perform activities related to knowledge strategy and perform activities associated with self-knowledge. 2) the metacognition activity of the female students are : a) understanding the problems phase: perform activities related to strategic knowledge and perform activity associated with self-knowledge; b) devising a plan phase : perform activity associated with knowledge about cognitive tasks; c) carrying out the plan phase : perform activity related to strategic knowledge and associated with knowledge about cognitive tasks; d) looking back phase: perform activities related to strategic knowledge and  perform activity associated with self-knowledgeKeywords: metacognition, mathematics problem solving, gender 
POLA PIKIR (MINDSET) GURU DALAM MENERAPKAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK PADA PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA DITINJAU DARI GENDER Nunung Juwariah; Tri Atmojo Kusmayadi; Budi Usodo
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 4 (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 describe the mindset of female and male teachers in implementing the scientific approach to the study of mathematics. It was a qualitative research. The subjects were taken by purposive sampling. The subjects of this research were mathmatics teachers of class X SMAN 3 Madiun. The subject of the research as much as 2 teachers consisted of 1 male teacher and 1 female teacher.Data collection techniques in this research were  interviews and observation. Techniques to validate the data source triangulation and time triangulation. The data analysis technique used was the concept of Miles and Huberman consisted of data reduction, data display, and conclusion. The research findings are as follows (1) the female teacher do not always apply a scientific approach. During observation process, female teacher used abstract mathematic object. During question activity female teacher had obstacles. To solve this obstacle, female teacher usually persuades students with statements. During experiment activity, female teacher created guidance question. During mobilization activity, female teacher provide questions that provoke and leads to mathematics concepts. During communication activity, female teacher using presentation although it require long time. (2) during observation male teacher used approach from learned students. during question activity, the male teacher of dividing students became some group then provide opportunitie for students to ask on a friend in the group. During mobilization activity, teacher must have perfected mathematical concepts which belongs to the students. During communication activity, male teacher asked the students to present the result of that has accured. Keywords: Mindset, scientific approach, gender.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE TEAMS GAMES TOURNAMENT DAN STUDENT TEAMS ACHIEVEMENT DIVISION BERBANTUAN MEDIA GEOGEBRA PADA MATERI PROGRAM LINEAR DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS BELAJAR SISWA KELAS XII IPA SMA NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN KUDUS Puji Ayuni; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Riyadi Riyadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 3 (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 investigate: (1) which learning model of the Geogebra-based TGT type, the Geogebra-based STAD type, and direct learning model results in a better learning achievement in the topic of Linear Program; (2) which students of those with the high learning creativity, those with the medium learning creativity, and those with the low learning creativity have a better learning achievement in the topic of Linear Program; (3) in each learning model, which students of those with the high learning creativity, those with the medium learning creativity, and those with the low learning creativity have a better learning achievement in the topic of Linear Program; (4) in each learning creativity, which learning model of the Geogebra-based TGT type, the Geogebra-based STAD type, and direct learning model results in a better learning achievement in the topic of discussion of Linear Program. This research used the quasi experimental research method with the factorial design of 3 x 3. The population of the research was all of the students in Grade XII of the Natural Science Program of Senior Secondary Schools of Kudus regency in Academic Year 2013/2014. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling. The samples consisted of three schools, namely: Senior Secondary School 1, Senior Secondary School 2, and Senior Secondary School 1 of Mejobo. The data of the research were analyzed by using the two-way analysis of variance (ANAVA) with unbalanced cells.The results of the analysis show that: (1) the Geogebra-based TGT type results in the same learning achievement in the topic of Linear Program as the Geogebra type-based STAD type, but the two former types result in a better learning achievement in the topic of Linear Program than the direct learning model; (2) the students with the high learning creativity have a better learning achievement in the topic of Linear Program than those with the medium learning creativity and those with the low learning creativity, and those with the medium learning creativity have a better learning achievement in the topic of Linear Program than those with the low learning creativity; (3) in the three learning models, the students with the high learning creativity have a better learning achievement in the topic of Linear Program than those with the medium learning creativity and those with the low learning creativity, and those with the medium learning creativity have a better learning achievement in the topic of discussion of Linear Program than those with the low learning creativity; and (4) the students with the high, medium and low learning creativity,  the Geogebra-based TGT type results in the same learning achievement in the topic of Linear Program as the Geogebra type-based STAD type, but the two former types result in a better learning achievement in the topic of Linear Program than the direct learning modelKeywords: TGT, STAD and Geogebra
PROSES BERPIKIR KREATIF SISWA CLIMBER DALAM PEMECAHAN MASALAH MATEMATIKA PADA MATERI PELUANG Indra Kurniawan; Tri Atmojo Kusmayadi; Imam Sujadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 6 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: This study aimed to describe the process of creative thinking of students in XI grade IPA-2 SMA Negeri 1 Polanharjo that have AQ climber characteristic in the mathematics problem solving in quiet materials based on Wallas steps, they are: preparation, incubation, illumination and verification.  The approach t used in this study is qualitative approach. The collecting data in this study used task based on interview method. The process of creative thinking of the climber student in the mathematics problem solving in probability materials, are: (1) in the preparation step, students were enthusiastically when they were given problem solving task. The students explain the case that they knowed and asked in complete and correct with some way, that were: (a) writing the steps and changing into examples, (b) just writing the steps, (c) just changing the case that known in examples; (2) in the incubation step, when the students are understanding probability of event, they: (a)are practising that probability, (b) focus to understand on the problem, (c) less focus to understand on the problem. Then students get an idea by making a complete diagram then multiply the possibilities of occuring on the first and second taking; (3) in the illumination step, student counts probability values are based on complete diagram to sum possibillity of the relevant probability. Students get the new way, that: (a) are the uncomplete diagram and probability formulas, (b) the uncomplete diagram, (c) probability formulas. Students explain the origin of the new way found. Students finish the problem with the new way; (4) in the verification step, students retest all the cases having done befound and corrected the obtained probability values using the old and new way, both of them get the same and correct result.Keywords: creative thinking, problem solving, and climber.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE PAIR CHECKS (PC) DAN TIPE TEAMS ASSISTED INDIVIDUALIZATION (TAI) PADA MATERI PELUANG DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA KELAS XI IPS SMA DI KOTA SURAKARTA TAHUN PELAJARAN 2013 / 2014 Veronica Sri Wigiyanti; Budiyono Budiyono; Sri Subanti
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 5 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The objective of research was to find out: (1) which learning model influenced better student learning achievement among Pair Checks (PC), Teams Assisted Individualization (TAI) or Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD), (3) which students had better mathematics learning achievement among those with auditory, visual, or kinesthetic mathematics learning style, (3) in each learning style  (auditory, visual, or kinesthetic), which one influenced better mathematics learning achievement  in Teams Assisted Individualization (TAI) or Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD), (4) in each learning model (Teams Assisted Individualization [TAI] and Student Teams Achievement Divisions [STAD]), which one influenced better mathematics learning achievement towards the students with auditory, visual, or kinesthetic learning style. This study was a quasi experimental research using 2 independent variables (learning model and students’ learning style) and 1 dependent variable (mathematics learning achievement). The data collection was conducted using documentation, test, and questionnaire. Technique of analyzing data used was a 3x3 two-way ANAVA with unbalanced cells. The samples of the research were taken by using the combination of stratified random and cluster random sampling techniques. The result of research showed that: (1) the students given PC learning model had better learning achievement than those given TAI model, those given PC had better learning achievement than those given STAD, while those given TAI and STAD models had equal good learning achievement; (2) the students with auditory and visual learning styles had equal good learning achievement, those with auditory had better learning achievement  than those with kinesthetic, and those with visual had better learning achievement  than those with kinesthetic; (3) in each learning model, the students with auditory and visual learning styles had equal good learning achievement, those with auditory had better learning achievement  than those with kinesthetic, and those with visual had better learning achievement  than those with kinesthetic, (4) in each learning style, the students given PC learning model had better learning achievement than those given TAI model, those given PC had better learning achievement than those given STAD, while those given TAI and STAD models had equal good learning achievement.Keywords: Pair  Checks, Team  Assisted  Individualization,  and   Student Teams Achievement Divisions
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN DISCOVERY LEARNING, PROBLEM SOLVING, DAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) PADA MATERI BANGUN RUANG SISI DATAR DITINJAU DARI SELF REGULATED LEARNING Miatun, Asih; Sujadi, Imam; Riyadi, Riyadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 7 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of this research was to determine the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement viewed from student’s self regulated learning. The learning model compared were discovery learning, problem solving, and TPS. The type of the research was a quasi-experimental research. The population were all students at the grade VIII of Junior High School in Boyolali regency. Sampling was done by stratified cluster random sampling. The samples were students of SMPN 4 Boyolali, SMPN 6 Boyolali, and SMPN 4 Mojosongo. The instruments used were mathematics achievement tests and self regulated learning questionnaire. The data were analyzed using unbalanced two-ways Anova. The conclusions were as follows. (1) Discovery learning model gave mathematics learning achievement better than problem solving and TPS learning model, problem solving and TPS learning model gave the same mathematics learning achievement. (2) Mathematics learning achievement of students with high self regulated learning was better than students with medium and low self regulated learning. Mathematics learning achievement of students with medium self regulated learning was better than students with low self regulated learning. (3) There was an interaction between learning models and the categories of self regulated learning towards the students mathematics learning achievement.Keywords: Discovery Learning, Problem Solving, Think Pair Share (TPS), self regulated learning.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER (NHT) DAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DENGAN PENDEKATAN MATEMATIKA REALISTIK (PMR) DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN INTERPERSONAL SISWA SMP SE-KABUPATEN GROBOGAN TAHUN PELAJARAN 2012/2013 Achmad Nurrofiq; Budiyono Budiyono; Sri Subanti
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 6 (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 determine the effect of learning models on learning achievement viewed from students’ interpersonal intelligence. The learning models compared were cooperative learning model Numbered Heads Together (NHT) with Realistic Mathematics Approach (RMA) approach, Think Pair Share (TPS) with Realistic Mathematics Approach (RMA) and direct learning. This research was a quasi-experimental research using factorial design of 3x3. The population of the research was all students of the Junior High Schools in Grobogan regency. The samples of the research were seven grade students of SMP Negeri 2 Purwodadi, SMP Negeri 2 Grobogan and SMP Negeri 7 Purwodadi in Grobogan regency (88 students for for first experimental class, 96 students for second experimental class, and 92 students for control class). The samples were chosen by using stratified cluster random sampling. In collecting the data, the instruments used were multiple-choice test of learning achievement in mathematics and student interpersonal intelligence questionnaire. The technique of analyzing the data was unbalanced two-ways Anova. The results of the research are as follows: (1) the cooperative learning model NHT with RMA give better achievement in mathematics than cooperative learning model TPS with RMA, and both result in a better learning achievement in mathematics than the direct learning model; (2) there are no any differences in the learning achievement in mathematics of the students with high, medium or low interpersonal intelligence; (3) in each interpersonal intelligence, the cooperative learning model NHT with RMA give better achievement in mathematics than cooperative learning model TPS with RMA, and both result in a better learning achievement in Mathematics than the direct learning model; (4) in each learning model, the students with high, medium and low interpersonal intelligence have the same learning achievement in mathematics.Keywords:          NHT, TPS, RMA, interpersonal intelligence, learning achievement in mathematics

Page 14 of 35 | Total Record : 347

 12   13   14   15   16 

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