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
 20   21   22   23   24 
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN TTW DAN TPS PADA MATERI BANGUN RUANG SISI DATAR DITINJAU DARI KEMAMPUAN PENALARAN MATEMATIS SISWA Arie Purwa Kusuma; Budiyono Budiyono; Dewi Retno Sari S
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 2 (2015): 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 the effect of the learning models on the learning achievement in Mathematics viewed from the reasoning abilities of the students. The models compared were the cooperative learning model of the Think Talk Write (TTW) type, the Think Pair Share (TPS) type, and the conventional learning model. 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 VIII of State Junior Secondary Schools of Wonosobo regency in Academic Year 2013/2014. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique. They consisted of 278 students, and were divided into three classes, namely: 93 in Experiment Class 1, 93 in Experiment Class 2, and 92 in Control Class. The instruments employed to gather the data of the research were test of learning achievement in Mathematics and test of mathematical reasoning ability. The data of the research were analyzed by using the two-way analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The results of the research are as follows. 1) The cooperative learning model of the TTW type results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics than the cooperative learning model of the TPS type and the conventional learning model, and the cooperative learning model of the TPS type results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics than the conventional learning model. Such results indicate the same result for each category of the mathematical reasoning abilities. 2) The students with the high mathematical reasoning have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those with the moderate and low mathematical reasoning abilities, and the students with the moderate reasoning ability have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those with the low mathematical reasoning ability. Such results signify the same result for each category of the learning models.Keywords: TTW, TPS, mathematics reasoning ability, mathematics achievement
ANALISIS KETERAMPILAN GEOMETRI SISWA DALAM MEMECAHKAN MASALAH GEOMETRI BERDASARKAN TINGKAT BERPIKIR VAN HIELE Nuraini Muhassanah; Imam Sujadi; Riyadi Riyadi
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 objective of this research was to describe the VIII grade students geometry skills atSMP N 16 Surakarta in the level 0 (visualization), level 1 (analysis), and level 2 (informaldeduction) van Hiele level of thinking in solving the geometry problem. This research was aqualitative research in the form of case study analyzing deeply the students geometry skill insolving the geometry problem based on van Hiele level of thingking. The subject of this researchwas nine students of VIII grade at SMP N 16 Surakarta consisted of three students of level 0(visualization), three students of level 1 (analysis), and three students of level 2 (informaldeduction) obtained from clustering technic. The data in this research was the characteristics ofgeometry skills obtained from the recording script of the interview done twice for the sake oftriangulation. The result of this research was the geometry skills of students in solving thegeometry problem. Students of level 0 (visualization) at the visual skill can define the square basedon the shape appearance; descriptive skill, can group the right name of the pictures given; drawingskill, can draw the square by labeling the certain parts; logical skill, can understand theconservation of the square picture in any position and realize the similarity from some pictures ofsquare; and application skill, can correlate the given information (physical object) and develop itinto geometry model as well as explain the characteristics of geometry from the physicalappearance. Then, the syudents of level 1 (analysis) at the visual skill, can explain thecharacteristics of the picture; descriptive skill, can define the square based on the characteristics;drawing skill, can construct the picture based on the given characteristics (verbal information) anddraw draw the other square; logical skill can mention the differences of squares and realize that thecharacteristics of square can be used to differentiate kinds of square; and application skill, can usethe geometry model in solving the problem. Next, the students of level 2 (informal deduction) atvisual skill, can admit the relation from any kinds of square by admitting the general characteristic;descriptive skill, can create the sentences showing the relation among the square based on thegeneral characteristics; drawing skill, can draw other square from the given square and explain thecharacteristics; logical skill, can use the characteristics of a square to decide a class of squarewhich is in the other kinds of square; and application skill, can use the model concept ofmathematic representing the relation among the objects.Key words: geometry kill, van Hiele level of thinking, problem solving, and geometry.
PROSES BERPIKIR REFLEKTIF SISWA KELAS VII SMP NEGERI 3 POLANHARJO KLATEN DALAM PEMECAHAN MASALAH PECAHAN Wahyuni, Fina Tri; Sujadi, Imam; Subanti, Sri
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 4 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The aims of this research was to describe the characteristics of reflective thinking process of the students in Grade VII of State Junior Secondary School 3 of  Polanharjo Klaten who have the high, moderate, and low abilities in solving fractional problems. This research used qualitative case study approach. The data of research were gathered through task-based in-depth interview. The results of research were the characteristics of reflective thinking process of the students as follows: 1) The students with the high initial ability in Mathematics: (a) in the problem understanding phase, they were able to mention information of the problems and to explain what has been done; (b) in the problem-solving planning phase, they were able to identify the concept of the problems and to explain what has been done; (c) in the implementation of problem-solving plan phase, they were able to realize the mistakes and to fix them, to examine the truth of an argument, to employ the internal knowledge, to relate the information that they have known, and to communicate ideas with symbols instead of pictures or direct objects; and (d) in the reexamination phase, they were able to draw conclusions to return the answers back into the contexts and to explain what has been done. 2) The students with the moderate initial ability in Mathematics: (a) in the problem understanding phase, they were able to mention information of the problems and to explain what has been done; (b) in the problem-solving planning phase, they were able to identify the concept of the problems, to employ the internal knowledge, to relate the information that they have known, and to explain what has been done; (c) in the implementation of problem-solving plan phase, they were unable to do reflective thinking; (d) in the reexamination phase, they were able to draw conclusions to return the answers back into the contexts and to explain what has been done. 3) The students with the low initial ability in Mathematics were able to do reflective thinking merely on the problem understanding phase, with the following characteristics: they were able to mention information of the problems and to explain what has been done.Keywords: Characteristics of reflective thinking process, problem solving, and initial ability in Mathematics.
ANALISIS KESALAHAN DALAM MENYELESAIKAN SOAL CERITA PADA MATERI LUAS PERMUKAAN BANGUN RUANG BERDASARKAN NEWMAN’S ERROR ANALYSIS (NEA) DITINJAU DARI KEMAMPUAN SPASIAL Mulyadi Mulyadi; Riyadi Riyadi; Sri Subanti
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: Newman’s Error Analysis (NEA) is a method to analyze the error occurring in the students. One of the main factors which causes the weakness of the students comprehension toward polyhedral material is spatial ability. This study aims at describing  error occurred in the students based on NEA viewed from spatial ability. The information of that error occurence can be used as a means of consideration in deciding the appropiate lesson plan. This study was a descriptive qualitative research with case study method. The subjects of research were the semester VIII  graders  of  SMPN  2  Kebonagung  in academic year of 2013/2014, there were 12 students who have hight spatial ability, 11 students who have medium spatial ability and 11 students who have low spatial ability. The sampling technique used was purposive sampling. The data were taken from the result of error diagnostic test which was followed by Certainly of Response Index (CRI) scores, spatial test and interview. The validity of data used triangulation techniques. The data was analyzed by using Miles and Huberman’s model. The result of research showed that based on NEA in the subject of hight spatial ability was 4,65% reading error, 13,95% comprehension error, 27,91% transformation error, 25,58% process skill error and 27,91% encoding  error. Medium spatial ability subjects obtain 2,94% reading error, 2,94% comprehension error, 32,35% transformation error, 29,41% process skill error and 32,35% encoding error. Subjects of low spatial ability obtain 3,03% reading error, 9,09% comprehension error, 30,30% transformation error, 27,27% process skill error and 30,30% encoding error. The errors are mainly made by the subjects because of the concept incomprehensibility, then misconception and the lowest one is the subjects comprehend the concept but they are careless in doing the assignment.Keyword: error, NEA, concept incomprehensibility, misconception, comprehend the concept 
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE GI DAN NHT DALAM LC7E TERHADAP PRESTASI BELAJAR MATEMATIKA DAN MOTIVASI BERPRESTASI DITINJAU DARI ADVERSITY QUOTIENT Wahyu Prihatiningrum; Budiyono Budiyono; 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 aim of this research was to determine the effect of learning models toward the learning achievement in Mathematics and the achievement motivation viewed from the Adversity Quotient (AQ). The learning models compared were Cooperative Learning Model of Group Investigation (GI) Type and Numbered Head Together (NHT) Type in Learning Cycle 7E (LC7E). This research used the quasi experimental research method. Its population was all of the students in Grade VII of State Junior Secondary Schools of Sukoharjo. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique. The samples consisted of 214 students, and they were divided into two groups, 107 students in Experimental Class 1 and 107 in Experimental Class 2. The instruments used for gathering the data of the research were test of achievement in Mathematics learning, questionnaire of achievement motivation, and AQ measurement tool. The data was analyzed using multivariate analysis of variance. The results of the research show that: (1) the students exposed to the NHT in LC7E have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than GI in LC7E; (2) the students exposed to the NHT in LC7E have a better achievement motivation than GI in LC7E; (3) the students with AQ of the climbers type have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those the campers or quitters type, and the students with AQ of the campers type have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those the quitters type; (4) the students with AQ of the climbers type have a better achievement motivation than the campers or quitters type, and the students with AQ of the campers type have a better achievement motivation than those the quitters type; (5) in each learning model, either in the NHT in LC7E or GI in LC7E, the students with AQ of the climbers type have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those the campers or quitters type, and the students with AQ of the campers type have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those the quitters type; (6) in each learning model, either the NHT in LC7E or the GI in LC7E, the students with AQ of the climbers type have a better achievement motivation than those the campers or quitters type, and the students with AQ of the campers type have a better achievement motivation than those the quitters type; (7) in each type of the AQ, either the quitters, campers, or climbers, the students exposed to the NHT in LC7E have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than GI in LC7E; and (8) in each type of the AQ, either the quitters, campers, or climbers, the students exposed to the NHT in LC7E have a better achievement motivation than GI in LC7E.Keywords:      NHT, GI, learning cycle, adversity quotient, and achievement motivation.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DENGAN PENDEKATAN REALISTIC MATHEMATICS EDUCATION (RME) DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA KELAS VIII SMP/MTs DI KABUPATEN SRAGEN Nyoto Nyoto; Budi Usodo; Riyadi Riyadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 5 (2015): 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 one had a better mathematics achievement, students instructed with the cooperative learning of Think Pair Share (TPS) type with Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) approach, the cooperative learning of TPS type, or the direct learning model; (2) which one had a better mathematics achievement, students who had visual learning style, auditorial learning style, or kinesthetic learning style; (3) on each type of learning model, which one had a better mathematics achievement, students who had visual learning style, auditorial learning style, or kinesthetic learning style; (4) on each learning style, which one had a better mathematics achievement, students instructed with the cooperative learning of TPS type with Realistic Mathematics Education approach, the cooperative learning of TPS type, or the direct learning model. This research was quasi experimental with 3×3 factorial design. The population was all students of the grade VIII State Junior High Schools/Islamic State Junior Secondary School in Sragen Regency. Sampling was done by stratified cluster random sampling technique. The sample consisted of 308 students. The instrument used to collect data was mathematics achievement test and questionnaire of students learning style. Balance test used unbalanced one way analysis of variance. The hypothesis test used unbalanced two ways analysis of variance at the significance level of 0,05. Based on hypothesis test, it can be concluded as follows. (1) Students intructed with the cooperative learning model of TPS type with RME approach had the same mathematics achievement as students intructed with the cooperative learning model of TPS type. Students intructed with the cooperative learning model of TPS type with RME approach and the cooperative learning model of TPS type had better mathematics achievement than students intructed with the direct learning model. (2) Students with visual learning style had the same mathematics achievement as students with auditorial learning style. Students with visual learning style had better mathematics achievement than student with kinesthetic learning style, and students with auditorial learning style had the same mathematics achievement as students with kinesthetic learning style. (3) On the cooperative learning model of TPS type with RME approach, the cooperative learning model of TPS type, and the direct learning model, students with visual learning style had the same mathematics achievement as students with auditorial learning style. Students with visual learning style had better mathematics achievement than student with kinesthetic learning style, and students with auditorial learning style had the same mathematics achievement as students with kinesthetic learning style. (4) On students with visual learning style, auditorial learning style, and kinesthetic learning style, students intructed with the cooperative learning model of TPS type with RME approach had the same mathematics achievement as students intructed with the cooperative learning model of TPS type. Students intructed with the cooperative learning model of TPS type with RME approach and the cooperative learning model of TPS type had better mathematics achievement than students intructed with the direct learning model.Keywords: TPS, RME, students learning style
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE TAPPS DAN TSTS TERHADAP KEMAMPUAN MENYELESAIKAN SOAL CERITA MATEMATIKA DITINJAU DARI TIPE KEPRIBADIAN Robia Astuti; Budiyono Budiyono; Budi Usodo
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 4 (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 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. 
PROSES BERPIKIR KREATIF SISWA DALAM PEMECAHAN MASALAH MATEMATIKA DITINJAU DARI KEMAMPUAN MATEMATIKAPADA SISWA KELAS X MIA SMAN 6 SURAKARTA Wulantina, Endah; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Riyadi, Riyadi
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 research aims to describe the students’ creative thinking process of tenth grade of MIA of SMAN 6 Surakarta in solving mathematics problems towards students who have high, medium and low ability in mathematics. The researcher choosed qualitative research in case study design. The results showed that 1). Students’ creative thinking process in the tenth grade of MIA of SMAN 6 Surakarta with high ability in Mathematics are (a) Preparation, the students identify the prior knowledge about the assignment carefully than the students select the information in solving the problem appropriately; (b) Incubation, the students turn silent when they are thinking about how to solve the problem, the students memorize the way to solve the problem; (c) Illumination, the students continue the first idea which is found before; (d) Verification, the students recheck the problem solving before taking the conclusion, the students test the result by suiting to the data from the assignment. 2) The students’ creative thinking process in the tenth grade of MIA of SMAN 6 Surakarta with medium ability in Mathematics are (a) preparation, the students identify well the problem which is being asked select the information appropriately but they need some stimulus from another person; (b) Incubation, the students turn silent when they are thinking about how to solve the problem, the students memorized the way to solve the problem; (c) Illumination, the students only focus on the relevant information and could not explore the idea to find out the idea, here students also need the stimulus from another person; (d) verification, the students recheck the result before taking conclusion; 3) the students’ creative thinking process in the tenth grade of MIA of SMAN 6 Surakarta with low ability in Mathematics are: (a) Preparation, the students identify well the problem which is being asked, the students select the information recursively by comprehending the assignment. They also still need the stimulus in the form of question; (b) Incubation, the students memorize the appropriate pattern to solve the problem but sometimes they hesitate so they ask the problem to the researcher; (c) Illumination, the students solve the problem from what they already learnt from the previous way, the students focus on the relevant information and tent to avoid the complex information so that the student could not explore the idea to find out another idea, they tent to solve the problem with one idea; (d) Verification, the students recheck the result before taking conclusion but there are many corrections in the final answer.Keywords: Ability in Mathematics,  Creative Thinking Process, Mathematics Problem Solving.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE THINK PAIR SHARE DENGAN EVERYONE IS A TEACHER HERE DAN THINK PAIR SHARE PADA MATERI KPK DAN FPB DITINJAU DARI MOTIVASI BELAJAR SISWA Nur Anida Laila; Tri Atmojo Kusmayadi; Budi Usodo
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 aims of this research were to determine:  (1) which had better learning achievement among students taught by using learning model Think Pair Share with Everyone is a Teacher Here (TPS  with ETH), Think Pair Share (TPS), or direct instruction, (2) which had  better learning achievement, students with motivation level of high, medium, or low (3) at each of the learning model, which had better learning achievement, students with motivation level of high, medium, or low,  (4) at each of the motivation level, which had better learning achievement among students who taught by using learning model TPS with ETH with TPS, or direct intruction.  Based on the test hypothesis, it could be concluded as follows. (1) Cooperative learning  model TPS with ETH produces learning achievement better than the model of TPS and direct learning. TPS learning produces better achievement than direct learning models. (2) The mathematics learning achievement of students with high motivation is better than those with moderate and low motivation. The mathematics learning achievement of students with moderate motivation is better than those with low motivation. (3) At the TPS with ETH learning and direct instruction, the mathematics learning achievement of students with high motivation is as same as those with moderate motivation. Similarly, mathematics learning achievement of students with moderate motivation is as same as those with low motivation. While in the case of the TPS learning, the learning achievement of students with high motivation is as same as those with moderate motivation. Similarly, the mathematics achievement of students with the moderate motivation is the same as students with low motivation. However, the mathematics achievement of students with high motivation is better than thoese with low motivation. (4) For students with high and moderate motivation, the learning achievement of students taught with TPS learning with ETH is the same as those with those taught with merely TPS and direct learning. In the other hand TPS with ETH gives good impsct to the learning achievement than direct learning.  On the case of student’s low motivation TPS with ETH shows that the use two of the method gives good impact in the same with the student treated with TPS or direct learning.Keywords: TPS with ETH, TPS, direct learning, and Student’s Learning Motivation
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN DISCOVERY LEARNING, GROUP INVESTIGATION, DAN THINK TALK WRITE DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK TERHADAP PRESTASI DAN KREATIVITAS BELAJAR MATEMATIKA PADA MATERI BANGUN RUANG SISI DATAR DITINJAU DARI KEMAMPUAN PENALARAN SISWA Nuraya, Naufalia; 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: This research aims to know the different effect among learning models used i.e, Discovery Learning (DL) with scientific approach, Group Investigation (GI) with scientific approach, and Think Talk Write (TTW) with scientific approach. The research method was quasi experimental. The population was all students of grade VIII State Junior High School of district Tegal year of 2014/2015. Sample was taken by stratified cluster random sampling technique. The hypothesis test used two way MANOVA with unbalanced cell. The results of the research were as follows: (1) a. Learning achievement of students treated by DL with scientific approach is better than those treated by GI and TTW with scientific approach, and learning achievement of student treated by GI with scientific approach is the same good with student treated by TTW with scientific approach; b. Mathematics learning creativity of student treated by DL and GI with scientific approach is better than those treated by TTW with scientific approach, and mathematics learning creativity of student treated by DL with scientific approach is the same good with student treated by GI with scientific approach; (2) a. Learning achievement of students who have high and medium reasoning ability is better than those who have low reasoning ability, and learning achievement of students who have high reasoning ability is the same good with students who have medium reasoning ability; b. Mathematics learning creativity of students who have high and medium reasoning ability is better than those who have low reasoning ability, and mathematics learning creativity of students who have high reasoning ability is the same good with students who have medium reasoning ability; (3) a. In the high, medium, and low reasoning ability, learning achievement of students treated by DL with scientific approach is better than those treated by GI and TTW with scientific approach, and learning creativity of student treated by GI with scientific approach is the same good with student treated by TTW with scientific approach; b. In the high, medium, and low reasoning ability, mathematics learning creativity of students treated by DL and GI with scientific approach is better than those treated by TTW with scientific approach, and learning creativity of students treated by DL with scientific approach is the same good with student treated by GI with scientific approach; (4) a. In DL, GI, and TTW with scientific approach, learning achievement of students who have high and medium reasoning ability is better than those who have low reasoning ability, and learning achievement of students who have high reasoning ability is the same good with students who have medium reasoning ability; b. In DL, GI, and TTW with scientific approach, mathematics learning creativity of students who have high and medium reasoning ability is better than those who have low reasoning ability, and mathematics learning creativity of students who have high reasoning ability is the same good with students who have medium reasoning ability.Keywords: DL, GI, TTW, Scientific Approach, Reasoning Ability, Learning Achievement, Mathematics Learning Creativity.

Page 22 of 35 | Total Record : 347

 20   21   22   23   24 

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