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
 21   22   23   24   25 
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE TGT DAN TAI PADA MATERI VEKTOR KELAS XII SMA DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS SISWA Tri Silaningsih; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Riyadi Riyadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 7 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: This study aimed to determine: (1) which model produces better learning achievement TGT, TAI, or direct learning model, (2) to find out which one has the better learning achievement between students with high creativity, moderate or low creativity, (3) to determine which one gives better learning achievement between cooperative learning model TGT, TAI or Direct for each student creativity, (4) to find out which one gives the better learning achievement among students who have high creativity, moderate creativity or lower creativity in each of the learning model.This study was a quasi-experimental study with a 3 x 3 factorial design. The sampling technique was done by stratified cluster random sampling. The instrument used for data collection was a questionnaire and math achievement tests. The instrument has been tested by some experts before it is used to conduct trials. Hypothesis testing used two- way Anava with unbalanced cells. Before the Anava test, research data are tested first by test analysis requirements that were test for normality and homogeneity test. The results of two- way Anava analysis show: (1) learning model of TGT and TAI produce better learning achievement, compared to the direct instructional model, while the learning model of TAI and TGT has no difference; (2) Students who have high creativity and moderate creativity have a better learning achievement than the students who have low creativity, the students who have high creativity have better learning achievement than the students who have moderate creativity;  (3) students who have creativity of high, moderate or low have on the model TGT learning and TAI have better learning achievement compared to the direct instructional model, while the learning model TGT produce the same learning achievement as TAI learning model; (4) cooperative learning model TGT, TAI and Direct give better result for students who have high and moderate creativity than students  who have low creativity, as well as the students who have high creativity provide a better learning achievement than moderate creativity.Keywords: Learning TGT, TAI, and creativity
EFEKTIFITAS PEMBELAJARAN DENGAN PENDEKATAN KONTEKSTUALvDAN PENDEKATAN PEMECAHAN MASALAH DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR PADA SISWA SEKOLAH MENENGAH PERTAMA DI KABUPATEN BOJONEGORO Abdul Ghofur; Tri Atmojo Kusmayadi; Suyono Suyono
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 3 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The objective in the research is to find out: (1) the learning approach giving better learning achievement, whether learning with contextual approach with problem solving approach or with direct learning; (2) the student learning style providing better learning achievement, whether visual, auditory, or kinesthetic learning styles; (3) in each learning approach, who having learning achievement better, the students with visual, auditory or kinesthetic learning style; and (4) in each learning style, which one providing better learning achievement, the learning with contextual approach with problem solving approach or with direct learning. The population of research was all IX (ninth) graders of Junior High School in Bojonegoro Regency consisting of 55 school. The sample was taken using stratified cluster random sampling. The sample of research consisted 305 students divided into experiment I, experiment II, and control groups.The conclusion of research was: (1) the learning with contextual approach giving better mathematics learning achievement than the problem solving approach and direct learning. (2) The students with visual learning style had learning achievement better than those with auditory one. But, there was no difference of learning achievement between the students with visual and those with kinesthetic learning style and there was no difference of learning achievement between the students with auditory and those with kinesthetic learning style. (3) In learning with contextual approach, all learning styles had the same learning achievement, while in the learning with problem solving approach, the students with visual learning styles had different learning achievement, the students with visual learning style had the same learning achievment with the students with kinestetic learning styleand the students with auditory learning style had the same learning achievment with the students with kinestetic learning style. Indirect learning, there was no difference of learning achievement between the students with visual, auditory and kinesthetic learning styles. (4) In the students with visual,auditory and kinesthetic learning style, there was no difference of learning achievement between the students with contextual approach,problem solving approach and direct learning.Keywords: contextual, problem solving, learning style.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE THINK-PAIR-SHARE (TPS) DAN PROBLEM BASED LEARNING (PBL) DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK PADA MATERI BANGUN RUANG SISI DATAR DITINJAU DARI KEMAMPUAN AWAL SISWA SMP KELAS VIII SE-KABUPATEN SRAGEN Supriyatin, Supriyatin; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Mardiyana, Mardiyana
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 9 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract : The aim of the research was to determine the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement viewed from prior competency. The learning models compared were TPS with scientific approach, PBL with scientific approach and direct learning. This was quasi-experimental research with 3x3 factorial design. The population were all students of Junior High School in Sragen. The samples of research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique and consisted of 297 students. The instruments used were mathematics achievement test and prior competency test. The data analysis technique used unbalanced two ways anova. Based on the data analysis, it can be concluded as follows. (1) The students treated with PBL learning model with scientific approach provided better learning achievement than those treated with TPS and those treated with direct learning model. The students treated with TPS learning model with scientific approach provided equal mathematics learning achievement to those treated with direct learning. (2) The students with high prior competency had better learning achievement than those with medium and those with low prior competencies. The students with medium prior competency had better learning achievement than those with low one. (3) In the TPS learning model with scientific approach and direct learning, the students with high and medium prior competencies had better learning achievement than those with low one. In the PBL learning model with scientific approach, the students with high prior competency had better learning achievement than those with low prior competencies and both of them provided the same learning achievement than those with medium one. (4) The students with high prior competency category had the same learning achievement in TPS type of learning model with scientific approach, PBL learning model with scientific approach and direct learning model. In medium prior competency category, PBL learning model with scientific approach provided better learning achievement than TPS learning model with scientific approach did, and both of them provided the same learning achievement as the direct learning did. Meanwhile in low prior competency category, PBL learning model with scientific approach provided better learning achievement than TPS learning model with scientific approach and direct learning model, and TPS learning model with scientific approach provided the same learning achievement as the direct learning did.Keywords: Mathematics Learning Achievement, TPS, PBL, Scientific Approach, Prior Competency 
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN RECIPROCAL TEACHING (RT) DAN PROBLEM BASED LEARNING (PBL) PADA MATERI PELUANG DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS BELAJAR SISWA KELAS XI SMA/MA NEGERIDI KABUPATEN KETAPANG PROVINSI KALIMANTAN BARAT Rahman Haryadi; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Dewi Retno Sari S
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 8 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The aims of this study were to investigate:  (1) which learning model produces students’ better mathematics learning achievement, Reciprocal Teaching (RT), Problem-Based Learning (PBL), or conventional learning model; (2) which students’ have better mathematics learning achievement, those with high, medium, or low learning creativity; (3) viewed from learning models, which students’ have better mathematich learning achievement, those with high, medium, or low learning cretivity; (4) viewed from their creativity level, which learning model produces better mathematich learning achievement RT, PBL, or conventional model. This study was a quasi-experimental research with 3x3 factorial designs. The population was the students of XI class, State SMA/MA in Ketapang District, West Kalimantan Province in year academic 2013/2014. The samples were taken through stratified cluster random sampling technique. The entire samples were 312 students comprising 101 students for the first experimental group, 108 students for the second experimental group and 103 students for control group. The data were collected through the mathematical achievement tests and the learning creativity questionnaires. The hypothesis testing employed  unbalanced two ways of ANOVA. The results of the study are as follows. (1)  RT produced students’ better mathematics learning achievement than PBL and conventional models; PBL produced the same mathematical achievement as conventional model. (2) The students with high learning creativity had better mathematics learning achievement than those with medium and low learning creativity; the students with medium creativity had better achievement than those with low creativity. (3) Treated with RT, the students with high creativity learning  had better mathematics learning achievement than those with medium and low creativity; the students with medium creativity had better achievement than those with low creativity; treated with PBL, the students with high, medium, and low learning creativity had the same achievement; treated with conventional model, students with  high  creativity  had the same achievement as those with medium; the students with high creativity had better achievement than those with low creativity; the students with medium creativity had the same achievement as those with low creativity; (4) Viewed from their high learning creativity, students treated with RT had better mathematics learning achievement than those treated with PBL and conventional  model; those treated with PBL had the same achievement as those treated with conventional model. Viewed from their medium learning creativity, students treated with RT had better mathematics learning achievement than those treated with PBL and conventional model; those treated with PBL had the same achievement as those treated with conventional model. Viewed from their low learning creativity, students treated with RT, PBL and conventional had the same  mathematics learning achievement.Keywords: RT, PBL, learning creativity, the mathematical achievement.
EKSPERIMENTASI PEMBELAJARAN REALISTIC MATHEMATICS EDUCATION (RME) DENGAN PROBLEM SOLVING DAN REALISTIC MATHEMATICS EDUCATION (RME) DENGAN PROBLEM POSING DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS SISWA KELAS VIII SMP NEGERI DI KOTA SURAKARTA TAHUN PELAJARAN 2012/2013 Satrio Wicaksono Sudarman; Budiyono Budiyono; Sri Subanti
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 4 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of the research was to determine the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement viewed from the student creativity. The learning model compared were RME with problem solving, RME with problem posing on conventional. The type of the research was a quasi-experimental research. The population was the students of Junior High School in Surakarta on academic year 2012/2013. The samples of this research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique. The samples consisted of 269 students who were divided into 90 students in the first experiment class, 90 students in the second experiment class, and 89 students in the control class. The result of research showed that: (1) RME with problem solving provided better learning achievement than RME with problem posing and the conventional model. The RME learning model with problem posing provided better learning achievement than conventional one, (2) the students having high creativity had better learning achievement than those having medium and low creativity. The students having medium creativity had better learning achievement than did those having low creativity, (3) students taught by using RME with problem solving having high creativity level had better learning achievement than those having medium and low creativity level and students having medium creativity level had learning achievement as good as the low creativity level. Students taught by using RME with problem posing and conventional model had equal learning achievement in each level of creativity, and (4) students having high creativity level taught by using RME with problem solving had better learning achievement than those taught by using RME with problem posing and conventional model. Students having high creativity taught by using RME with problem posing and conventional model had equally good learning achievement. Students having medium and low creativity level had equal learning achievement in each learning model.Keywords: RME with problem solving, RME with problem posing, learning achievement,creativity.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN NUMBERED HEAD TOGETHER DAN LEARNING CELL PADA ASPEK PENGETAHUAN DAN KETERAMPILAN SISWA DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN EMOSIONAL PADA MATERI OPERASI ALJABAR KELAS VIII SMP NEGERI DI KABUPATEN PACITAN Domas, Joko; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Sari Saputro, Dewi Retno
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 1 (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 know the effect of the learning models on the learning achievement of knowledge and skill aspects in mathematics viewed from the emotional quotient of the students. The learning models compared were NHT, Learning Cell and classical model with scientific approach. This research used the quasi experimental research method. This population was all of the students in Grade VIII of State Junior Secondary Schools in Pacitan regency. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique and consisted of 261 students, divided into three groups, namely: 88 students in Experimental Group 1, 86 students in Experimental Group 2, and 87 students in Control Group. The instruments of the research include test of learning achievement of the knowledge aspect, test of learning achievement of the skill aspect, and questionnaire of emotional quotient. The technique of analyze data used the two-way multivariate analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The results of the research were as follows: (1) the cooperative learning model of the NHT and the Learning Cell types with scientific approach gave a better learning achievement of knowledge and skill aspects than the classical learning model with scientific approach, and the cooperative learning model of the NHT and the Learning Cell types with scientific approach gave the same learning achievement of knowledge and skill aspects; (2) the students with the high emotional quotient had a better learning achievement of knowledge and skill aspects than those with the moderate and low emotional quotient, and the students with the moderate and low emotional quotient had the same learning achievement of knowledge and skill aspects; (3) in each learning model with scientific approach, the students with the high emotional quotient had a better learning achievement of knowledge and skill aspects than those with the moderate and low emotional quotient, and the students with the moderate and low emotional quotient had the same learning achievement of knowledge and skill aspects; (4) in each of the emotional quotient, the cooperative learning model of the NHT and the Learning Cell types with scientific approach gave a better learning achievement of knowledge and skill aspects than the classical model with scientific approach, and the cooperative learning model of the NHT and the Learning Cell types with scientific approach gave the same learning achievement of knowledge and skill aspects.Keywords: NHT, learning cell, classical, scientific approach, emotional quotient, knowledge, skill.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DAN THINKING ALOUD PAIRS PROBLEM SOLVING (TAPPS) PADA MATERI BANGUN RUANG SISI DATAR DITINJAU DARI SIKAP PERCAYA DIRI SISWA SMPN KABUPATEN SUKOHARJO Maghfiroh Yanuarti; Budi Usodo; Riyadi Riyadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 10 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The objective of this research was to investigate the effect of the learning models on the learning achievement in Mathematics viewed from the self confidence of the students. The learning models compared were Think Pair Share (TPS)  model, Thinking Aloud Pairs Problem (TAPPS) model, and conventional model. This research was the quasi-experimental research with 3×3 factorial design. The population of the research was all students of Junior High School (SMP) in Sukoharjo. The samples were chosen by using stratified cluster random sampling. The samples were 302 students; consisted of 100 students in the first experimental class, 101 in the second experimental class, and 101 students in control class. The instruments used to collect the data were the test of mathematics achievement and questionnaire of self confidence. Pre-requisite tests were used Lilliefors method for normality test and Bartlett method for homogeneity test. After examining the data, it showed that the data had same variance and they were in normal distribution. Prior knowledge data are examined by using one-way ANOVA with unbalanced cells. It showed that three classes had balance prior knowledge. Meanwhile, the technique of analyzing the data was two-ways ANOVA with unbalanced cells. The result of research showed that: (1) TPS model had better learning achievement than TAPPS model and conventional model, TAPPS model had better learning achievement than conventional model. (2) the students having high self confidence had better learning achievement than those having medium and low self confidence, the students having medium and low self confidence had equally mathematics learning achievement. (3) there was an interaction the aforementioned learning models and the categories of the self confidence on the learning achievement in Mathematics of the student.Keywords:Think Pair Share (TPS), Think Aloud Pairs Problem Solving (TAPPS), mathematics learning achievement, and self confidence.
ANALISIS PROSES PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA DI KELAS VIII AKSELERASI SMP NEGERI 1 BOYOLALI Nurmalitasari Nurmalitasari; Imam Sujadi; Tri Atmojo Kusmayadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 6 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of the research was to describe planning and implementation of the learning process performed by mathematics teacher in the class VIII acceleration of SMPN 1 Boyolali. It was a qualitative research casestudy.The subject of this research were taken by using the purposive sampling. The subject of the research were mathematics teacher class VIII acceleration fisrt grade and second grade. The techniques of collecting the data in this research were documentation, interview and observation. The techniques of validating the data were source triangulation and time triangulation. The technique of analyzing the data was Miles and Huberman concept, namely, data reduction, data presentation, and conclusion drawing. The findings of the research show that planning of the learning process performed mathematics teacher in the class VIII acceleration of SMPN 1 Boyolali equal to the planning process of mathematics learning in the regular classroom, the difference lies in the allocation of time. The process of preparation of instructional time allocation in accelerated classes every basic competence with respect to the number of weeks was effective as seen from accelerated academic calendar, the number of basic competencies, depth, complexity, and level of interest of a basic competence. Implementation of the learning process performed mathematics teacher in the class VIII acceleration of SMPN 1 Boyolali, approaches, strategiesandmethods, is student-oriented activities. The approachused by teachersis the approach behaviour (behaviour therapy). Learning strategies are instructional strategies that emphasize learning out comes in intellectual abilities and learning strategies student-oriented activities. The method is applied teacher combines several methods such as lectures, question and answer, discussion and drill that emphasize student activity. Keywords: planning of the learning process, implementation of the learning process, syllabus, lesson plan, learning approaches, learning strategies,  learning methods, acceleration
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN PROBLEM POSING DAN PROBLEM SOLVING DENGAN PENDEKATAN PMR TERHADAP PRESTASI BELAJAR DAN KEMAMPUAN KOMUNIKASI MATEMATIS DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS SISWA KELAS VII SMP NEGERI DI KABUPATEN SUKOHARJO Hodiyanto, Hodiyanto; Budiyono, Budiyono; Slamet, Isnandar
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 2 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The objective of this research was to investigate the effect of learning models with realistic mathematic education (RME) approach on learning achievement and mathematical communication ability viewed from student creativity. The learning models compared were Problem Posing (PP), Problem Solving (PS) and direct learning models. This research used a quasi-experimental research. The population were the seventh grade students of junior high school in Sukoharjo. The samples of this research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique. The proposed hypothesis of this research was analyzed by using the two way multivariate analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The results of the research are as follows: (1) model of PP learning and model of PS learning with RME approach result the same achievement, but model of PP learning with RME approach results in a better mathematical communication ability than model of PS learning with RME. Model of PP learning and model of PS learning with RME approach result in better achievement and mathematical communication ability than direct learning model. (2) the students with the high creativity have better achievement and mathematical communication ability than those with the moderate or low creativity, but the students with the moderate and low creativity have the same achievement and mathematical communication ability. (3) in each creativities of students, model of PP learning and model of PS learning with RME approach result in better achievement and mathematical communication ability than direct learning model. Model of PP learning and model of PP learning with RME approach result the same achievement, but model of PP learning with RME approach results in a better mathematical communication ability than model of PS learning with RME. (4) in each learning models, the students with high creativity have better achievement and mathematical communication ability than those with medium and low creativity, and the students with moderate and low creativity have the same achievement and mathematical communication ability.Keywords: PP Learning, PS Learning, RME Approach, Direct Learning, Mathematical Communication Ability, Achievement, and Creativity of students.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE NUMBERED HEAD TOGETHER (NHT) BERBASIS MIND MAPPING DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA KELAS VII SMP NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN PACITAN TAHUN PELAJARAN 2013/2014 Wahyu Utomo; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Tri Atmojo Kusmayadi
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 objective of the research was to determine the influence of learning models toward mathematics achievement viewed from the students’ learning styles. The compared learning models were mind mapping based on Numbered Head Together (NHT) cooperative learning model, NHT cooperative learning model and direct instruction model. The type of the research was a quasi-experimental research. The population was the students of junior high school in Pacitan regency on academic year 2013/2014. The size of the sample was 237students consisted of 79 students in the first experimental group, 80 students in the second experimental group and 78 students in the control group.  The  instruments  used  were  mathematics achievement test and learning styles questionnaire. The data was analyzed using two way analysis of variance with unequal cell frequencies. The conclusions of the research were as follows. (1) mind mapping based on NHT cooperative learning model gives better mathematics achievement than NHT cooperative learning model and direct instruction model, NHT cooperative learning model gives better mathematics achievement than direct instruction model. (2) The visual learning style students have better mathematics achievement than the auditory learning style students and the kinaesthetic learning style students, the auditory learning style students have better mathematics achievement than the kinaesthetic learning style students. (3) For all learning models, the visual learning style students have better mathematics achievement than the auditory learning style students and the kinaesthetic learning style students, the auditory learning style students have better mathematics achievement than the kinaesthetic learning style students. (4) For all the students’ learning styles, mind mapping based on NHT cooperative learning model gives better mathematics achievement than NHT cooperative learning model and direct instruction model, NHT cooperative learning model gives better mathematics achievement than direct instruction model.Keywords: NHT, mind mapping, learning styles

Page 23 of 35 | Total Record : 347

 21   22   23   24   25 

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