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
 23   24   25   26   27 
EKSPERIMENTASI PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA DENGAN MODEL KOOPERATIF TIPE NHT DAN TPS TERHADAP PRESTASI BELAJAR DAN MOTIVASI BERPRESTASI SISWA DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN EMOSIONAL POKOK MATERI PERSAMAAN LINEAR SATU VARIABEL PADA SISWA SMP NEGERI DI KOTA SURAKARTA Aspriyani, Riski; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Sari S, Dewi Retno
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: This research was aimed to know: (1) which gave achievement and motivation to do better, students who were subjected to cooperative models of NHT, TPS, or Conventional and students with high, medium, or low emotional intelligence; (2) on each model of learning and at each category of emotional intelligence which provided achievement and motivation to do better. The  population was all the students of  VII grade of Junior High Schools in Surakarta year of 2013/2014 and obtained a sample of  266 students. The instruments used was achievement test, motivation, and emotional intelligence questionnaire. Test requirements analysis included a multivariate normality and the variance-covariance homogeneity test. Balance test used a unbalanced one way multivariate and hypothesis testing used unbalanced two way multivariate. The results of research were: (1a) students subjected to NHT gave as good as the achievement of TPS but better than Conventional, and TPS provided a better achievement than Conventional. As well students subjected to NHT, TPS, and Conventional gave the same motivation, (1b) students with high emotional intelligence provided as good learning achievement as the students with moderate and low emotional intelligence. As well students who have high emotional intelligence gave better motivation than medium or low emotional intelligence but students with medium emotional intelligence provided as good  motivation as the students with low emotional intelligence; (2ai) in each learning model, students with high, medium, and low emotional intelligence gave the same achievement, (2aii) in NHT model, students with high emotional intelligence gave as good as the motivation of students with medium emotional intelligence. As well students with high and medium emotional intelligence gave motivation better than low emotional intelligence, (2aiii) in TPS model, students with high emotional intelligence gave motivation better than medium and low emotional intelligence but students with medium emotional intelligence gave as good motivation as students with low emotional intelligence, (2aiv) in Conventional model, students with high, medium, and low emotional intelligence gave the same motivation, (2bi) in each category of emotional intelligence, NHT gave as good as the achievement of TPS, but NHT and TPS gave better achievement than Conventional, (2bii) at high emotional intelligence, students subjected to NHT gave as good as the motivation of TPS, but NHT and TPS better than Conventional, (2biii) at medium and low emotional intelligence, students subjected to NHT, TPS, and Conventional gave the same motivation.Keywords: NHT, TPS, emotional intelligence, learning achievement and achievement motivation
EKSPERIMENTASI PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE JIGSAW DAN GROUP INVESTIGATION TERHADAP PRESTASI BELAJAR PERSAMAAN GARIS LURUS DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN MAJEMUK SISWA KELAS VIII SMP DI KABUPATEN PONOROGO Jemani, Jemani
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 2 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

AbstractThis Research aims to find out: (1) which one is better, the learning use Expository, Jigsaw or Group Investigation models to effect mathematics achievement of straight line equation, (2) which one is better, the learning with linguistic intelligence, logical mathematical intelligence or visual spatial intelligence to effect mathematics achievement of straight line equation, (3) for students of multiple intelligences various, which one is better, the learning use Expository, Jigsaw or Group Investigation models to effect mathematics achievement of straight line equation. The research was desained by faktorial 3x3. The research population was VIII grade of Junior High School first semester of 2012/2013 at Ponorogo regency. The sample was taken by using Stratified Cluster Random Sampling, obtained some students of SMP Negeri 6 Kecamatan Ponorogo, SMP Negeri 5 Kecamatan Ponorogo dan SMP Negeri 2 Kecamatan Babadan ordered as high, medium and low groups. The data collection was taken by document, questionnaire dan test method. Document method was used for finding the report scores of VII grade second semester of 2011/2012 academic year, as balance test for GI, Jigsaw and Expository learning. Questionnaire method was used to know the dominance multiple intelligences of students. So, test method was used to know mathematics achievement of straight line equation. Technique of data analizing was used an unbalanced two way analysis of variance. The result of research were: (1) Group Investigation learning and Expository learning have the mathematics achievement of straight line equation better than Jigsaw learning, meanwhile Expository learning have the mathematics achievement of straight line equation same as Group Investigation learning, (2) among student with linguistic intelligence, logical mathematical intelligence or visual spatial intelligence have the same of mathematics achievement of straight line equation, (3) among the students of multiple intelligence, Group Investigation learning and Expository learning to effect mathematics achievement of straight line equation better than Jigsaw learning and Group Investigation learning to effect mathematics achievement the same as Expository learning.Keywords: Group Investigation, Jigsaw, Expository, Multiple Intelligences
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE STRUCTURED NUMBERED HEADS, THINK TALK WRITE, DAN LEARNING TOGETHER DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN LOGIKA MATEMATIKA SISWA Utami, Desi Tri; Budiyono, Budiyono; Subanti, Sri
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 purpose of this research was to find out the effect of the cooperative learning models on the learning achievement in mathematics viewed from the students’ logical mathematical intelligence. The learning models compared were the cooperative learning models of Structured Numbered Heads (SNH), Think Talk Write (TTW), and Learning Together (LT) with scientific approach. This research used quasi experimental research method with the factorial design of 3x3. The population of the research was all of the students in grade VII of Junior High School in Sukoharjo Regency. The data was analyzed using two-ways analysis of variance with unbalanced cell. The conclusions of the research were as follows. (1) SNH and TTW with scientific approach had the same learning achievement. SNH and TTW with scientific approach had better learning achievement than LT with scientific approach. (2) Students with high logical mathematical intelligence had better learning achievement than the students with middle and low logical mathematical intelligence, also students who had middle logical mathematical intelligence had better learning achievement than students who had low logical mathematical intelligence. (3) In SNH with scientific approach, the students who had high logical mathematical intelligence had learning achievement as good as students with middle and low logical mathematical intelligence. In TTW and LT with scientific approach, the students who had high logical mathematical intelligence had learning achievement as good as students with middle logical mathematical intelligence, and the students who had high and middle logical mathematical intelligence had better learning achievement than the students with low logical mathematical intelligence. (4) For all level of students’ logical mathematical intelligence, the students who were given by SNH, TTW, and LT with scientific approach had the same learning achievement.Keywords: Structured Numbered Heads, Think Talk Write, Learning Together, Scientific Approach, Logical Mathematical Intelligence
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE TWO STAY TWO STRAY (TSTS) DAN GROUP INVESTIGATION (GI) PADA MATERI SEGIEMPAT DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN MATEMATIS LOGIS SISWA Susandi, Ardi Dwi; Budiyono, Budiyono; Sari S, Dewi Retno
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

Abstyact:The objective of this research was to investigate the effect of the learning models on the learning achievement in Mathematics viewed from the mathematical logical quotient of the students. The learning models compared were the cooperative learning model of the TSTS type, the Cooperative Learning Model of the GI type, and the direct learning model. This research used the quasi experimental research.  Its population was all of the students in Grade VII of State Junior Secondary Schools of Cirebon regency in Academic Year 2013/2014. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique and consisted of 364 students. They were grouped into three classes, namely: 123 in Experimental Class 1, 117 in Experimental Class 2, and 124 in Control Class. The instruments to gather the data were test of achievement in Mathematics on the learning material of Quadrangle, and test of mathematical logical quotient. The proposed hypotheses of the research were analyzed by using the two way analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The results of the research were as follows. 1) The cooperative learning model of the TSTS type results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics than the cooperative learning model of the GI type and the direct learning model, the cooperative learning model of the GI type results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics than the direct learning model. 2) The students with the high mathematical logical quotient have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those with the moderate mathematical logical quotient and those with the low mathematical logical quotient, the students with the moderate mathematical logical quotient have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those with the low mathematical logical quotient. 3) There was an interaction the aforementioned learning models and the categories of the mathematical logical quotient on the learning achievement in Mathematics of the students.Keywords:TSTS, GI, and mathematical logical quotient.
EKSPERIMENTASI PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA DENGAN MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE JIGSAW DENGAN PENDEKATAN KONTEKSTUAL BERBASIS LESSON STUDY PADA MATERI BANGUN RUANG SISI LENGKUNG DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA KELAS IX MTs NEGERI KABUPATEN MADIUN Umami, Farah; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Suyono, Suyono
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:This research aims to find out: (1) which one providing better mathematics learning achievement, Jigsaw type of cooperative learning model with Lesson Study based contextual approach, Jigsaw type of cooperative learning model with contextual approach, or conventional learning, (2) which one providing mathematics learning achievement, the students with visual, auditory, or kinesthetic learning styles, (3) in each learning model, which one providing better mathematics learning approach, the students with visual, auditory, or kinesthetic learning styles, (4) in each learning style, which one providing better mathematic learning achievement, Jigsaw type of cooperative learning model with Lesson Study-based contextual approach, Jigsaw type of cooperative learning model with contextual approach, or conventional learning model.This study was a quasi-experimental research with 3x3 factorial design. The population of research was all IX graders of MTs Negeri of Madiun Regency in the school year of 2012/2013 consisting of 13 school. The sampling technique used was stratified cluster random sampling with 259 students as the sample. The school classification based on the Mathematics score in National Examination of 2010/2011 school year obtained MTsN Kare for the sample with high classification, MTsN Sidorejo Wungu for the one with medium classification, and MTsN Rejosari for the one with low classification. The research instrument used was mathematics achievement test and student learning style questionnaire. Technique of analyzing data used was an umbalanced twoway analysis of variance.The conclusions of research were: (1) the jigsaw type of cooperative learning model with lesson study-based contextual approach provided better learning achievement than the one with contextual approach and conventional learning, while the jigsaw type of cooperative learning model provided the achievement as same as the conventional learning did. (2) the students with visual learning style had learning achievement equal to those with auditory learning style, while both of them had better learning achievement than those with kinesthetic learning style. (3) the students with the visual,auditorial and kinesthetic learning style, the jigsaw type of cooperative learning model with lesson study-based contextual approach provided better mathematics learning achievement than jigsaw type cooperative learning with contextual approach and conventional learning, while the jigsaw type of cooperative learning provided the achievement as same as the conventional learning did. (4) in Jigsaw type of cooperative learning model with Lesson Study based contextual approach, Jigsaw type of cooperative learning model with contextual approach, or conventional learning,, the students with visual learning style provided mathematic learning achievement as same as those with auditory learning style337did, while both of them provided better learning achievement than those withkinesthetic learning style.Keywords: Cooperative Learning, Jigsaw, Contextual Teaching and Learning,Lesson Study, Learning Style.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE JIGSAW DENGAN PENDEKATAN CTL TERHADAP PRESTASI BELAJAR DAN ASPEK AFEKTIF SISWA PADA MATERI BANGUN RUANG SISI DATAR DITINJAU DARI KEMAMPUAN SPASIAL Perwira Negara, Habib Ratu; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Sujadi, Imam
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 10 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The aims of this research were to find out the different effect of the cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type with CTL approach, the cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type, and the direct learning model towards students mathematics learning achievement and affective aspect on the subject of plane geometry viewed from the students spatial ability, and category of spatial ability consisted of high, medium and low. The research was quasi experimental. The population was all students of grade VIII State Junior High School in Madiun City on the second semester of 2013/2014 academic years. The sample of this research consisted of 261 students. The instrument used to collect data was mathematics achievement test, questionnaire of students affective aspect and spatial ability test. The hypothesis test used unbalanced two ways multivariate analysis of variance. The results of the research were as follows. (1) The cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type with CTL approach and the cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type gaves a better achievement than direct learning model, and the cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type with CTL approach gaves the same achievement as the cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type. (2) The cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type with CTL approach gaves a better achievement than the cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type and direct learning model, and the cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type gaves a better achievement than direct learning model. (3) Students with the high spatial ability had better achievement than students with the medium and low spatial ability, and students with the medium spatial ability had better achievement than students with the low spatial ability. (4) Students with the high spatial ability had better affective aspect than students with the medium and low spatial ability, and students with the medium spatial ability had the same affective aspect as students with the the low spatial ability. (5) On the cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type with CTL approach, Jigsaw type and direct learning model, students with the high spatial ability had better achievement than students with the medium and low spatial ability, and students with the medium spatial ability had better achievement than students with the low spatial ability. (6) On the cooperative learning models of Jigsaw type with CTL approach and Jigsaw type, students with the high, medium and low spatial ability had the same affective aspects. On the direct learning model, students with the high spatial ability had better affective aspects than students with the medium spatial ability, while students with the high and low spatial ability and students with the medium and low spatial ability had the same affective aspects. (7) On students spatial ability high, medium and low, the cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type with CTL approach and the cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type gaves a better achievement than direct learning model, and the cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type with CTL approach gaves the same achievement as the cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type. (8) On students with the high and medium spatial ability, the cooperative learning model of Jigsaw type with CTL approach, Jigsaw type and direct learning model gives the same affective aspect. On students with the medium spatial ability, the cooperative learning of Jigsaw type with CTL approach gaves a better affective aspect than the direct learning model, while the cooperative learning of Jigsaw type with CTL approach and Jigsaw and also the cooperative learning of Jigsaw type and direct learning model gaves the same affective aspect.Keywords: Jigsaw, CTL approach, spatial ability, learning achievement, and affective aspect. 
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DENGAN PENDEKATAN OPEN-ENDED PADA MATERI BANGUN RUANG SISI DATAR DITINJAU DARI DISPOSISI MATEMATIS SISWA KELAS VIII SMP NEGERI DI KABUPATEN PURWOREJO Wijayaanto, Zainnur; Budiyono, Budiyono; Sujadi, Imam
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 study aimed to know: 1) which one of the learning models gave a better achievement between Think Pair Share (TPS) cooperative learning model with Open-Ended Approach, TPS, or direct learning model, 2) which one of the students with mathematical disposition category had a better achievement between students with high, moderate or low mathematical disposition, 3) in each student’s mathematical disposition category, which learning model gave a better student’s achievement in mathematics, 4) in each learning models, which one of the students with mathematical disposition category had a better student’s achievement in mathematics. This was quasi-experimental study with 3x3 factorial design. The study population was all eighth grade students of state junior high school in Purworejo District. Instruments used to collect data were mathematics achievement test and the student’s mathematical disposition questionnaire. The data were analyzed using unbalanced two ways ANOVA. Based on the data analysis, it was concluded that: 1) TPS with Open-Ended Approach gave better achievement than TPS and direct learning model while TPS and direct learning model gave same achievement, 2) the students with high mathematical disposition had better achievement than the students with moderate and low mathematical disposition, and the students with moderate mathematical disposition had better achievement than the students with low mathematical disposition, 3) at all categories of students’ mathematical disposition, TPS with Open-Ended Approach, TPS, and direct learning model gave the same achievement, 4) in the TPS with Open-Ended Approach and TPS, the students with high mathematical disposition had better achievement than the students with moderate and low mathematical disposition, and the students with moderate mathematical disposition had better achievement than the students with low mathematical disposition. In the direct learning model, the students with high mathematical disposition had better achievement than the students with moderate and low mathematical disposition, while the students with moderate and low mathematical disposition had the same achievement.Keywords: Think Pair Share (TPS), Open-Ended Approach, Direct Instruction, Mathematical Disposition, Learning Achievement in Mathematics.
PERBANDINGAN KEMAMPUAN REPRESENTASI DAN KEMAMPUAN PEMECAHAN MASALAH MATEMATIK PADA SISWA YANG MENDAPAT PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF DISERTAI QUANTUM LEARNING DENGAN SISWA YANG MENDAPAT PEMBELAJARAN KONTEKSTUAL DITINJAU DARI KEMAMPUAN AWAL SISWA Wicaksono, Bintang; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Sutrima, Sutrima
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 5 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The objectives of this research are to investigate the effect of learning models on representation and mathematical problem solving ability viewed from the student prior knowledge. The learning models compared were cooperative combined with quantum learning and contextual learning. The samples of this research were taken by using stratified cluster random sampling technique. The populations were all of the students in grade VII of State Primary Schools in Sukoharjo regency 2012/2013. The number of the samples was 142 students, in which 72 students in the experimental class one, and 72 students in the experimental class two. The instrument used to collect the data were test of the representation ability and test of the problem solving ability. The data was analyzed by using multivariate analysis of variance. The results of the research are: (1) the students taught by using contextual learning have better on both the representation and the mathematical problem solving ability than the students taught by using cooperative combined with quantum learning, (2) the students having high prior knowledge category have better on both the representation and the mathematical problem solving ability than the students having medium prior knowledge category, and the students having medium prior  knowledge category have better on both the representation and the mathematical problem solving ability than students having low prior knowledge category, (3) there was no interactions between the learning model and the prior knowledge toward the students’ representation and mathematical problem solving ability. It means that the use of either of contextual learning model or cooperative combined with quantum learning model, the students having high prior knowledge category have better on both the representation and mathematical problem solving ability than the students having  medium  prior knowledge category, and the students having medium prior knowledge category have better on both the representation and the mathematical problem solving ability than the students with low prior knowledge category. The students having high, medium, or the low prior knowledge taught by using contextual learning have better on both the representation and the mathematical problem solving ability than the students taught  by using cooperative combined with quantum learning. Keywords: cooperative combined with quantum learning, contextual learning, students prior knowledge, representation ability, mathematical problem solving ability.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE THINK PAIR SHARE, NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER DAN PROBLEM BASED LEARNING DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK PADA MATERI PERSAMAAN DAN PERTIDAKSAMAAN LINEAR SATU VARIABEL DITINJAU DARI KONSEP DIRI Darmawan, Agus; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Sujadi, Imam
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 aim of this research was to investigate the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement viewed from the student self concept. The learning model compared were Think Pair Share, Numbered Heads Together dan Problem Based Learning with saintific approach (TPS-S, NHT-S and PBL-S). This research was a quasi experimental with the factorial design of 3×3. The population of this research was all of students in grade VII of State Islam Junior High Schools of Magetan regency in academic year 2014/2015. The samples of the research consisted of 243 students and were gathered through stratified cluster random sampling. The instruments consisted of the test of learning achievement and self concept questionnaire. Hypotheses testing was performed using two-way analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. Based on the results of hypotheses testing, it was concluded as follows. 1) Students with  the cooperative learning model of the TPS-S, NHT-S and PBL-S learning model had the same mathematics achievement. 2) Students with high self concept had better mathematics achievement than students with medium and low self concept, students with medium self concept and low self concept have the same mathematics achievement. 3a) On the TPS-S learning model, students with high self concept had better mathematics achievement than students with low self concept, students with high self concept and medium self concept have the same mathematics achievement, students with medium self concept and low self concept have the same mathematics achievement. 3b) On the NHT-S and the PBL-S learning models, students mathematics achievement on each self concept categories had the same mathematics achievement. 4) On the each students self concept categories, students achievement on each learning model types had the same mathematics achievement.Keywords: Think Pair Share (TPS), Numbered Heads Together (NHT), Problem Based Learning (PBL), Scientific Approach and Self Concept.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER (NHT) DENGAN METODE PENEMUAN TERBIMBING PADA MATERI KUBUS DAN BALOK DITINJAU DARI KEMAMPUAN SPASIAL DAN GAYA KOGNITIF SISWA Hidayat, Abdul Aziz; Riyadi, Riyadi; Subanti, Sri
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 1 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The objective of this research was to investigate the difference of learning achievement in Mathematics on the learning of Cubes and Cuboids in each learning model viewed from the spatial abilities and the cognitive styles. This research used the quasi experimental research with the factorial design of 3x3x2. The proposed hypotheses of the research were analyzed by using the three-way analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The results of the research are as follows. 1) The students instructed with the NHT learning model with guided discovery method have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those instructed with the NHT learning model and those with the direct learning model, and the students instructed with the NHT learning model have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those with the direct learning model. 2) The students with the high, moderate, and low spatial abilities have the same good learning achievement in Mathematics. 3) The students with the cognitive style of field independent have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those with the cognitive style of field dependent. 4). In each category of the spatial abilities, the students instructed with the NHT learning model with guided discovery method have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those instructed with the NHT learning model and those with the direct learning model, and the students instructed with the NHT learning model have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those with the direct learning model. 5) In each category of the spatial abilities, the students instructed with the NHT learning model with guided discovery method have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those instructed with the NHT learning model and those with the direct learning model, and the students instructed with the NHT learning model have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those with the direct learning model.Keywords: NHT, guided discovery, spatial abilities,  and cognitive styles.

Page 25 of 35 | Total Record : 347

 23   24   25   26   27 

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