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
 18   19   20   21   22 
ANALISIS MISKONSEPSI SISWA PADA MATERI POKOK LINGKARAN DITINJAU DARI KESIAPAN BELAJAR DAN GAYA BERPIKIR SISWA KELAS XI IPA SMA N 3 SURAKARTA TAHUN AJARAN 2013/2014 Wardani, Endang Purwati; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Subanti, Sri
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 purposes of this research were: (1) knowing the characteristics of the misconception, and (2) knowing the causes of the misconception of the XI grade students in the academic year of 2013/2014 in  equation of circle and equation of tangent line of a circle viewed from the student’s readiness and style of learning. Qualitative research was applied in this research. The subject of the research are students of the eleven grade of SMA Negeri 3 Surakarta. The source of data was taken from informants (students), documentation (questionnaire), and test. Data collection was taken by using interview, diagnostic test, and questionnaire. Data validity used the source of triangulation. Data analysis used Miles and Huberman’s concept that are data collection, data reduction, presenting the data, and drawing the conclusion. The result of the research showed as follows: (1) students who are ready to learn and have the synthetic thinking style in understanding the locus of a point on the circle and determining the equation of tangent line of  a circle,  experience a misconception of theoretical concept. Meanwhile, in determining the circle equation, the students who are ready to learn with synthetic thinking style, don’t have any misconception.  (2) Students who are ready to study and have analytic thinking style in determining the equation of circle (determining the center point and the radius) experience a misconception in co relational concept. In understanding the locus of a point on the circle and determining the equation of tangent of line, students who are ready to study with analytical thinking style, experience a misconception in theoretical concept. (3) Students who are not ready to learn with synthetic thinking style experience a misconception in determining the equation of a circle (determining the center point and the radius), the misconception is in co relational and theoretical concept. In determining the equation of tangent line of a circle, students who are not ready with synthetic thinking style experience misconception of theoretical concept. While in understanding the locus of a point on the circle, generally   students who not ready to learn with synthetic thinking style do not experience misconception. (4) Students who are not ready to learn with analytical thinking style experience misconception in determining the equation of circle (determining the center point and radius), namely the misconception of co relational and theoretical concepts. In determining the locus of a point on the circle, students who are not ready to learn with the analytical thinking style experience misconception of theoretical concept. (5) In general the cause of misconception for the students is the difficulty of the students to classify the form of the equation of the circle and the equation of tangent line of a circle.Keywords: misconception, readiness to learn, thinking style
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PROBLEM BASED LEARNING DAN DISCOVERY LEARNING PADA MATERI PERBANDINGAN DAN SKALA DITINJAU DARI SIKAP PESERTA TERHADAP MATEMATIKA DIDIK KELAS VII SMP KABUPATEN KLATEN TAHUN PELAJARAN 2013/2014 Puji Rahayu; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Dewi Retno Sari S
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

Abstrack: The aims of this research were to determine: (1) the better students’ achievement in learning by using Problem Based Learning (PBL), Discovery Learning (DL) or direct learning models (2) the better students’ achievement among the students who have positive, neutral or negative attitude (3) the better students’ achievement in each category attitude, in learning by using PBL, DL or direct learning models (4) the better students’ achievement in each learning model, among the students who have positive, neutral or negative attitude. This research used a quasi-experimental research with the population of seventh grade students of Junior High Schools in Klaten Regency which have implemented curriculum 2013 in the Academic Year 2013/2014. The sampling technique used stratified cluster random sampling and three schools selected namely SMPN 1 Delanggu, SMPN 1 Prambanan and SMPN 2 Wedi.  Two-way variance analysis was used to test the hypothesis, followed by scheffe’ technique. Considering the result of analysis, the following conclusion could be drawn. (1) The students’ achievement who learnt by using DL was better than PBL and direct learning models. The students’ achievement who learnt by using PBL were similar to direct learning models. (2) The students’ achievement with positive attitude was better than neutral and negative attitude. The students’ achievement with neutral attitude was better than negative attitude. (3) In the positive and neutral attitude, the students’ achievement who learnt by using PBL, DL and direct learning models were similar. In the negative attitude, the students’ achievement who learnt by using DL model were better than PBL and direct learning models and the students’ achievement who learnt by using PBL and direct models were similar. (4) In learning by using PBL, the students’ achievement with positive attitude were better than negative one, the positive and neutral attitude ware similar and the neutral and negative attitude were similar too. In learning by using DL, the student’s achievement with positive, neutral and negative attitude were similar. In learning by using direct learning, the students’ achievement with positive attitude were better than the negative one, the positive and neutral attitude were similar and the neutral and negative attitude were similar too.Keywords: Problem Based Learning, Discovery Learning, students’ Attitude, achievement of mathematics.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL JIGSAW SNOWBALL DRILLING DAN PEER TUTORING SNOWBALL DRILLING PADA MATERI POKOK TABUNG, KERUCUT, DAN BOLA DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA Nelly Indriastuti P; 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 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 PEMBELAJARAN PROBLEM BASED LEARNING, TEAM ASSISTED INDIVIDUALIZATION DAN STUDENT TEAMS ACHIVEMENT DIVISIONS DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK TERHADAP PEMAHAMAN KONSEP DAN KETRAMPILAN KOMPUTASI MATEMATIKA DITINJAU DARI ADVERSITY QUOTIENT Ardiyanto, David; Budiyono, Budiyono; Usodo, Budi
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: The aim of this research was to know the effect of the Problem Based Learning (PBL), Teams Assisted Individualization (TAI), and Students Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD) with the scientific approach  viewed from students Adversity Quotient (AQ). The results of the research were as follows. (1) Students who were subjected to the PBL have a better understanding of concepts than students with the TAI while students were subjected to TAI have the same understanding of concepts as students who with STAD (2) Students who were subjected to the PBL have the same computing skills as students with the TAI, and TAI have the same computing skills as students with STAD, but students who were subjected to the PBL have better computing skills than students with STAD. (3) Students with high AQ have better conceptual understanding than students with medium and low AQ, and the students with medium AQ were better than low AQ. (4) Students with high AQ has better computing skills than students with medium and low AQ, and students with medium AQ have the same computing skills as low AQ. (5) In each of the learning model, students with high AQ have a better understanding of concepts than students with medium and low AQ, and students with medium AQ have a better understanding of concepts than low AQ. (6) In each of the learning model, students who have high AQ have better computing skills than students who have medium and low AQ, and students with medium AQ have the same computing skills equally as students who have low AQ. (7) In each AQ, students were subjected to the PBL have better understanding of concepts than students who were subjected to the TAI while students who were subjected to TAI have the same understanding of concept as with students who were subjected to the STAD. (8) In each AQ, students with the PBL have the same computing skills as students with TAI, students with TAI have the same computation skills as students of  STAD, but students who were subjected to the PBL has the computing skills has better than students with STAD.Keywords : Learning model of PBL, TAI, STAD, scientific approach, Adversity Quotient (AQ), conceptual understanding, computation skill.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN GROUP INVESTIGATION (GI) YANG DIMODIFIKASI PADA MATERI BANGUN RUANG SISI DATAR DITINJAU DARI KEMANDIRIAN BELAJAR SISWA KELAS VIII SMP NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN PACITAN TAHUN PELAJARAN 2013/2014 Budi Sasomo; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Dewi Retno Sari S
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: This aim of the research was to know the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement viewed from the student learning independency. The learning model compared were modified GI, GI and direct learning. This research  was a quasi experimental with the factorial design of 3x4. The population of this research was all students class VIII in SMP Negeri in Pacitan regency. The sampling technique used was stratified cluster random sampling. Hypotheses testing was performed using two-way analysis of variance with unequal cells. Based on the results of hypotheses testing, it were concluded that: 1) modified GI learning model give better achievement than GI and direct learning, while GI learning model and direct learning gave the same achievement. 2) Students with independent type have better achievement than students with individualistic type, conscientious type and self-conscious type, students with individualistic type have better achievement than students with conscientious type and self-conscious type, students with conscientious type and self-conscious type have the same achievement. 3) For all of learning independency type, modified GI learning model give better achievement than GI learning model and direct learning, GI learning model and direct learning give the same achievement.  4) For all of learning models,  students with independent type, individualistic type, conscientious type and self-conscious type have the same achievement.Keywords: Modified Group Investigation (GI), student learning independency. 
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) BERBANTUAN MEDIA INTERAKTIF PADA MATERI PELUANG DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA Elywati Elywati; Budiyono Budiyono; Imam Sujadi
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 goals of the research were to discover: (1) which learning model has better academic achievements, the Think Pair Share (TPS) learning model aided by interactive media, TPS, or the direct learning model; (2) which has better academic achievements, students having a visual, auditory, or kinesthetic learning style; (3) which has better academic achievements, students having a visual, auditory, or kinesthetic learning style for each of the different learning models and (4) which has better academic achievements, the TPS learning model aided by interactive media, TPS, or the direct learning model for each of the different learning styles. The type of research was quasi-experimental research. The population of the research was all class XI students in state high schools in the Sukoharjo district during the academic year 2013/2014. The number of sample members in the research was 306 students, with 205 students in the experimental class and 101 students in the control class. Samples were collected using a method of stratified cluster random sampling. The method used for analyzing data was a unbalanced two way analysis of variance, preceded by a prerequisite test analysis, namely a normality test using Lilliefors’ method and a homogeneity test using Bartlett’s method. Based on the results of the hypothetical testing, it could be concluded as follows. (1) The TPS learning model aided by interactive media is better than the TPS and direct learning models, while the TPS learning model is as good as the direct learning model. (2) The academic achievements of students studying mathematics having an auditory learning style were better than students having a visual and kinesthetic style, while the results of students having a visual style was as good as that of those having a kinesthetic style. (3) The differences of students academic achievement depended on the learning model. (4) The effectiveness of learning models depended on students learning style.Keywords: TPS Interactive Media, TPS, Direct Learning, Learning Style, Academic Achievements Studying Mathematics.  
ANALISIS PROSES DAN TINGKAT BERPIKIR KREATIF SISWA SMP DALAM PEMECAHAN MASALAH BENTUK SOAL CERITA MATERI LINGKARAN DITINJAU DARI KECEMASAN MATEMATIKA Isnaeni Umi Machromah; Riyadi Riyadi; Budi Usodo
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: The aim of this research was to analyze the process and level of creative thinking of junior high school students based on mathematics anxiety’s students. The subjects of this research were taken by using purposive sampling. The Subjects of this research were six 9th grade students of SMP N 3 Colomadu Karanganyar regency. The data were collected by questionnaire and task-based interview technique and validated by using time triangulation. The data were analyzed by collection, reduction, presentation, and conclusion. The results of this research were: (1) students with high mathematics anxiety had level 1 (almost not creative) and the processes were at preparation stage, students feel difficult to understand and identify the problem; at the incubation stage, students found the idea from picture’s observation; at illumination stage, students could not  make mathematics statement based on the problem enough; at verification stage, students read or counted again for investigating the answer and they could resume the result appropriate the reality of the problem, (2) students with medium mathematics anxiety had level 1 (almost not creative) and level 2 (quite creative), and the processes were at preparation stage, students could understand and identify the problem well; at the incubation stage, students found the idea from picture’s observation; at illumination stage, students could make mathematics statement based on the problem well; at verification stage, students counted again for investigating the answer and they could resume the result appropriate the reality of the problem, (3) students with low mathematics anxiety had level 2 (quite creative), and the processes were at preparation stage, students could understand and identify the problem so well; at the incubation stage, students found the idea from picture’s observation and from the knowledge before; at illumination stage, students could make mathematics statement based on the problem so well; at verification stage, students counted again for investigating the answer and they could resume the result appropriate the reality of the problem.Keywords: creative thinking processes; creative thinking level; word problem solving; mathematics anxiety. 
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN PROBLEM POSING DAN PROBLEM SOLVING PADA MATERI TRIGONOMETRI DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS PESERTA DIDIK KELAS XI IPA SMA SE-KABUPATEN KUDUS TAHUN PELAJARAN 2013/2014 Sugihardjo Sugihardjo; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Riyadi Riyadi
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 aim of this research was to determine the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement and learning interest viewed from the students creativity. The learning model compared were problem posing, problem solving and direct instruction. The type of the research was a quasi experimental research with factorial design 3 x 3. The population was the students of senior high school in Kudus regency on academic year 2013/2014. The size of the sample was 278 learnes consisted of 98 students in the first experimental class, 81 students in the second experimental class and 99 students in the control class. The instrument used were mathemathics achievement test and questioner. The data was analyzed using analysis variance of two ways with unbalanced of cell. The conclusions of the research were as follows. (1) Problem solving model has better learning achievement than problem posing and direct instruction. Students who were taught by problem posing has better learning achievement than direct instruction, (2) Students who have high learning creativity have the same learning achievement as students who have the medium creativity. Students who have high learning creativity have better learning achievement than students who have low creativity. Students who have medium learning creativity have the same learning achievement as students who have low creativity, (3) Students having high and low creativity that used problem posing, problem solving, and direct instructional model have the same achievement. While students having medium creativity that used problem solving model have better achievement than students that used direct instructional model, but students that used problem posing and problem solving model have the same achievement, and the students that used problem posing and direct instructional model have the same achievement, (4) In each category of learning model, students with high creativity, medium and low have the same learning achievement. Key Words: Problem Posing, Problem Solving, Direct Instruction, Learning Creativity
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN DISCOVERY LEARNING, PROBLEM BASED LEARNING, DAN THINK PAIR SHARE DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK TERHADAP KOMPETENSI PENGETAHUAN DAN SIKAP SOSIAL DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA Pinahayu, EK Ajeng Rahmi; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Slamet, Isnandar
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 find out the different effects of Discovery Learning (DL), Problem Based Learning (PBL), and Think Pair Share (TPS) models with scientific approach towards students knowledge and social attitude competency viewed from the students learning styles. This study was a quasi-experimental research. The population of research was all of the 8th grade of the State Junior High School in Puworejo Regency on the second semester of 2014/2015 academic year. The hypothesis testing of research were conducted using a two-ways multivariate analysis of variance with different cells. The conclusions of this research were as follows. (1) DL provided better knowledge competency than PBL and TPS, while PBL and TPS was same. (2) DL and TPS provided same social attitude competency, and both provided better social attitude competency than PBL. (3) The knowledge competency of visual students was better than auditory and kinesthetic, and the knowledge competency of students in those types was same. (4) The social attitude competency of visual and auditory students was same, the social attitude competency of visual students was better than kinesthetic, the social attitude competency of auditory and kinesthetic students was same. (5) In DL, the knowledge competency of visual students was better than auditory, the knowledge competency of visual students was better than kinesthetic, the knowledge competency of auditory and kinesthetic students was same. In PBL and TPS, the knowledge competency of visual, auditory, and kinesthetic students was same. (6) In DL and TPS, the social attitude competency of those three types was same. In PBL, the social attitude competency of visual students was better than auditory, the social attitude competency of visual and kinesthetic students was same, the social attitude competency of auditory and kinesthetic students was same. (7) In visual, DL provided better knowledge competency than PBL and TPS, PBL and TPS  provided same knowledge competency. In auditory and kinesthetic, DL, PBL, and TPS provided same knowledge competency. (8) In visual and kinesthetic, DL, PBL, and TPS provided same social attitude competency. In auditory, DL and PBL provided same social attitude competency, DL and TPS was same, and TPS provided better social attitude competency than PBL.Keywords: Discovery Learning, Problem Based Learning, Think Pair Share, Scientific Approach, Knowledge Competency, Social Attitude Competency, Learning Styles.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN PROBLEM SOLVING DAN PROBLEM POSING BERBANTUAN ALAT PERAGA DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS BELAJAR SISWA Nurmaningsih Nurmaningsih
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 1 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: This reaserch aimed to reveal the effect of a Problem Solving and a Problem Posing learning model assisting by media instrument to the mathematics achievement based on the students’ learning creativity. We used the second grade students of Junior High Schools in Pontianak as the population. This was a 3 x 3 factorial design quasi-experimental research. The techniques of data collection were a test, questionnaires and documentation method. The balance test, a prerequisite tests analysis (normality and homogeneity test), and hypothesis test using unbalanced two ways analysis of variance were the techniques of data analysis that used in this research. The result indicates: (1) a Problem Solving learning model assisting by media instrument gives the same mathematics achievement as a Problem Posing learning model assisting by media instrument, but it gives better mathematics achievement than a directed learning; Furthermore, there is no difference of mathematics achievement between a Problem Posing learning model assisting by media instrument and a directed learning; (2) the students with high, medium an low learning creativity have the same mathematics achievment; (3) for all category of the learning creativity, a Problem Solving learning model assisting by media instrument gives the same mathematics achievement as a Problem Posing learning model assisting by media instrument, but it gives better mathematics achievement than a directed learning; Furthermore, there is no difference of mathematics achievement between a Problem Posing learning model assisting by media instrument and a directed learning; (4) for all category of the learning models, the students with high, medium an low learning creativity have the same mathematics achievment.Key words : Problem Solving assisting by media instrument, Problem Posing assisting by media instrument, directed learning, learning creativity, mathematics achievement

Page 20 of 35 | Total Record : 347

 18   19   20   21   22 

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