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
 24   25   26   27   28 
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN TEAMS GAMES TOURNAMENT DAN NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHERDENGAN PENDEKATAN MATEMATIKA REALISTIK PADA MATERI LUAS PERMUKAAN BANGUN RUANG DITINJAU DARI KEAKTIFAN BELAJAR Komsatun, Siti; Riyadi, Riyadi; Sujadi, Imam
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 7 (2013): 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 determine the effect of learning models with approach on achievement of mathematics viewed from the student active learning. The learning approach compared were Teams Games Tournament with Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) approach, Numbered Heads Together (NHT) with Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) approach, and direct learning. This research was a quasi-experimental research with 3x3 factorial design. The population was all of the 2nd grade students of junior high school in Klaten regency. Sampling was done by stratified cluster random technique. The instruments used to collect data were the prior mathematics knowledge test, activity learning questionnaire, and achievement of mathematics test. The hypothesis test used unbalanced two way anova. The hypothesis test concluded that (1) students who taught  by TGT learning model with RME approach had the same learning achievement of students who taught NHT models with RME approach, students who taughtby TGT model with RME approach have better achievements mathematics learning than students who taught by direct learning, students who taught by NHT models with RME approach mathematics learning achievement better than students who taught by direct learning (2) based onthe results of unbalanced two way anova in each active category (high, medium, low), haven’t  the same learning achievement if taught TGT-RME learning models, NHT-RME, or directly, but based on the results of post hoc test anova have the same in the academic achievement of each activity category (high, medium, low) if taught TGT-RME learning model, NHT-RME, or directly. (3) based on the results of unbalanced two way anova haven’t the same in mathematics achievement in each category learning model(TGT-RME, NHT-RME, direct), between students with high active, medium, or low. However, based on post hoc anova, in each category learning model (TGT-RME, NHT-RME, right), students with high active, medium, or low have the same of mathematics achievement. Keywords: TGT-RME, RME-NHT, active student learning, mathematics learning achievements
EKSPERIMENTASI PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA DENGAN MODEL PROBLEM BASED LEARNING(PBL) DAN LEARNING CYCLE 5E DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK PADA MATERI DIMENSI TIGA DITINJAU DARI KEMANDIRIAN BELAJAR SISWA KELAS X SMA NEGERI DI-KABUPATEN SUKOHARJO Paryatun, Suji; Usodo, Budi; Sari Saputro, Dewi Retno
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 3 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The research aims to know: 1) which learning model is better achievement LC 5E with scientific appraoach, PBL, or direct learning models : 2) the learning autonomy category giving a better achievement among the high, medium, and low level of learning autonomy; 3) the learning autonomy which yields a better achievement of each learning model ; and 4) learning model which yields a better achievement of each learning autonomy category. The type of the research is a quasi-experimental research. The research is carried out in Sukoharjo regency. The populations of research are all 10th students of in Sukoharjo regency in which  school based curriculum applied in the academic year of 2014-2015. The sampling technique uses Stratified Cluster Random Sampling. The data collecting techniques use documents, questionnaires, and tests. The data analysis technique uses two-way variant analysis with unequal cells. The research concludes that; 1) the LC 5E learning model with scientific approach gives a better achievement in mathematics learning; 2) the students with high learning autonomy get better mathematics scores. The indicator is the average  scores of students with high learning autonomy are better than those with low or medium level; 3) In each learning model, the students with high learning autonomy get  better achievements than those  with medium or low as well  learning autonomy in general,whereas in high learning autonomy category, the LC 5E learning with scientific approach shows a better math achievement than PBL; and 4) For the classification of learning autonomy between the high level and the medium one,  learning model  LC 5E with scientific approach shows better achievement mathematics learning than the one with PBL  or direct learning, whereas, the low learning autonomy has no different achivement LC 5E with scientific approach, PBL or the direct one.Keywords: Mathematics Learning Achievement, Learning Autonomy, Learning Model
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF STAD WITH GUIDED DISCOVERY LEARNING PADA MATERI POKOK LINGKARAN DITINJAU DARI ADVERSITY QUOTIENT (AQ) Suriyah, Puput; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 3 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract:  The aims of this  research were to know: (1) which one is providing better mathematics learning achievement, students taught using cooperative learning of STAD with guided discovery learning, STAD or direct learning, (2) which one is having better mathematics learning achievement, students with Adversity Quotient (AQ) climbers, students with AQ campers or students with AQ quitters, (3) at each learning model, whether there are any mathematics learning achievement difference between students with AQ climbers, students with AQ campers or students with AQ quitters, (4) at each type of Adversity Quotient (AQ), whether there are any mathematics learning achievement difference between students taught using cooperative learning of STAD with guided discovery learning, STAD or direct learning. This research was a quasi experimental research using 3x3 factorial designs. The hypotheses testing used two ways ANOVA with unbalanced cell. This research concludes that: (1) students taught using cooperative learning of STAD with Guided Discovery Learning have better mathematics learning achievement than the students taught using STAD and direct instruction, as well as students who were taught using STAD have better mathematics learning achievement than the group of students taught using direct instruction, (2) students achievement with the climbers type of AQ were better than the students with the campers and quitters type of AQ while the students with the campers type of AQ have better mathematics learning achievement than the students with the quitters type of AQ, (3) in the cooperative learning of STAD with guided discovery learning, there was no difference in learning achievement in each type of AQ, in the STAD, there was no difference in learning achievement in each type of AQ, in the direct instruction, students with climbers type of AQ have better mathematics learning achievement than students with quitters type of AQ, (4) for the students who have climbers type of AQ, there was no difference in learning achievement in each learning models, for the students who have campers type of AQ, STAD with guided discovery learning produced better mathematics achievement than direct instruction, for the students who have quitters type of AQ, STAD with guided discovery learning produced better mathematics achievement than direct instruction.Keywords: STAD With Guided Discovery Learning, Adversity Quotient, Mathematics Learning Achievement
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE TWO STAY TWO STRAY DAN NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER PADA MATERI POKOK FUNGSI DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN INTERPERSONAL SISWA KELAS VIII SMP NEGERI SE-KOTA SURAKARTA Zainuddin, Zainuddin; Budiyono, Budiyono; Sujadi, Imam
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 2 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The purposes of this research were to determine: (1) which has better learning achievement, students are given TS-TS, NHT, or direct  intruction, (2)  which has better learning achievement, students with intrapersonal intelligence of high, medium or low, (3) which has better learning achievement, students with interpersonal intelligence of high, medium or low on each learning model, (4) which has better learning achievement, students are given TS-TS, NHT, and direct intruction on each interpersonal intelligence. This study was a quasi experimental research with 3 3 factorial design. The population of this study was all eighth grade students of junior high schools in Surakarta. Sampling was done by stratified cluster random sampling. The sample in this study are 271 people with details of 89 people for class experiment I, 91 people for class experiment II and 91 people for control class. The instruments used were mathematics achievement test and  questionnaire of student’s interpersonal intelligence. The data was analyzed using two ways anova. Based on the hypothesis test, it is concluded as follows. (1) Cooperative learning methods TS-TS type provide a better performance than cooperative learning method NHT type and direct intruction. (2) Mathematics learning achievements of students with high interpersonal intelligence levels did not differ from that of students with medium levels of interpersonal intelligence, while learning mathematics achievement of students with a high or medium level of interpersonal intelligence was better than that of students with low levels of interpersonal intelligence. (3) At each level of students’ interpersonal intelligence, TS-TS provided a better mathematics learning achievement compared with NHT learning and direct learning, while NHT learning provided no difference in mathematics learning achievement from direct learning. (4) At each learning model, mathematics learning achievement of students with high level of interpersonal intelligence was not different from that of students with medium level of interpersonal intelligence, while mathematics learning achievement of students with a high or medium level of interpersonal intelligence was better than that of students with low levels of interpersonal intelligence.Keywords: Two Stay Two Stray (TS-TS), Numbered Heads Together (NHT), Interpersonal Intelligence.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE TEAM ASSISTED INDIVIDUALIZATION (TAI) DAN THREE STEPS INTERVIEW (TSI) PADA MATERI FUNGSI DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN LOGIS MATEMATIS Riyanto, Nandyar Fisthi; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Subanti, Sri
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 5 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract:The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of the learning models TAI, TSI, and direct learning model on mathematics learning achievement viewed from the students logical mathematical intelligence. The type of this study was quasi experimental study with 3x3 factorial design. The population were the eighth-grade students of junior high schools in Boyolali Regency in the academic year of 2015/2016. Instruments used for data collection were mathematics achievement test and logical mathematical intelligence test. The data analysis technique used was the two-way ANAVA with unequal cell. Based on the hipothesis test, they were concluded that: (1) The mathematics learning achievement of TAI was better than TSI and direct learning model, the mathematics learning achievement of TSI was better than direct learning model. (2) The mathematics learning achievement of students with high logical mathematical intelligence were better than average and low logical mathematical intelligences. Students with average logical mathematical intelligence were better than low logical mathematical intelligences. (3) Students with high logical mathematical intelligence who were treated by TAI, TSI, and direct learning models had same mathematics learning  achievement; students with average logical mathematical intelligence who were treated by TAI was same of TSI and was better than direct learning model, TSI was better than direct learning model; students with low logical mathematical intelligence who were treated by TAI had better mathematics learning achievement than TSI and direct learning model, TSI students were better than direct learning model model. (4) In TAI learning model, the mathematics learning  achievement of high logical mathematical intelligence were better than the average and lower logical mathematical intelligence, the mathematics learning achievementof average has equal with low logical mathematical intelligence; in TSI learning model, students with high logical mathematical intelligence has equal of average logical mathematical intelligence, the mathematics learning achievements of high and average logical mathematical intelligence were better than the low logical mathematical intelligence; in direct learning model, students with high logical mathematical intelligence has better mathematics learning achievement than high and average of logical mathematical intelligence,  students with average logical mathematical intelligence has better mathematics learning achievement than low of logical mathematical intelligence.Keywords:Team Assisted Individualization, Three Steps Interview, Direct Learning Model, Logical Mathematical Intelligence, Achievement.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN ROUNDTABLE (RT) DAN QUESTION STUDENT HAVE (QSH) DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK PADA MATERI OPERASI BENTUK ALJABAR DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA KELAS VIII SMP SE-KOTA METRO LAMPUNG TAHUN PELAJARAN 2014/2015 Widyaningrum, Amalia Zulvia; Budiyono, Budiyono; Subanti, Sri
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 4 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: This research aimed to find out: (1) which one is better among learning models of RT with scientific approach, QSH with scientific approach or classical with scientific approach one in giving mathematics learning achievement, (2) which one is better among students’ learning styles, students having visual, auditorial or kinesthetic giving mathematics learning achievement. (3) in each learning model, which one is better among students’ learning styles in giving mathematics learning achievement and (4) in each learning styles, which one is better among RT with scientific approach, QSH with scientific approach or classical with scientific approach in giving mathematics learning achievement. This research was the quasi-experimental research with 3×3 factorial design. The population of research was all grade VIII students of Junior High School (SMP) in Metro, Lampung. The samples were chosen by using stratified cluster random sampling. The instruments that were used to collect the data were the test of mathematics achievement and questionnaire of learning styles. As a requirement of research, both of the instruments should be measured.  Test of students’ learning achievement data was measured by using content validity, level of difficulty, discrimination power and reliability. Questionnaire data were examined by using content validity, internal consistency and reliability. Pre-requisite tests were used Lilliefors method for normality test and Bartlett method for homogeneity test. After examining the data, it shows that the populations have same variance and they were in normal distribution. Prior knowledge data are examined by using one-way ANOVA with unbalanced cells. It shows that three classes have balance prior knowledge. Meanwhile, the technique of analyzing the data was two-ways ANOVA with unbalanced cells. The result of research showed as follows. (1) The RT with scientific approach had better learning achievement than the QSH and classical with scientific approach. QSH with scientific approach provided better learning achievement than the classical with scientific approach, (2) The students having visual learning style had learning achievement as good as those having auditorial learning style. The students having visual learning style had better learning achievement than did those having kinesthetic learning style. The students having auditorial learning style had learning achievement as good as those having kinesthetic learning style.  (3) In each of learning styles, student’s mathematics learning achievement is in constancy with result of learning models (4) In each learning models, the student’s mathematics learning achievement is in constancy with  result of learning style categories.Keywords: Round Table (RT), Question Student Have (QSH), Classical,  Learning Style
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE TEAMS GAMES TOURNAMENT DENGAN PENDEKATAN REALISTIC MATHEMATICS EDUCATION PADA MATERI POKOK PERSAMAAN DAN PERTIDAKSAMAAN LINIER SATU VARIABEL DITINJAU DARI ADVERSITY QUOTIENT SISWA KELAS VII SMP NEGERI SE-K Wijayanti, Septiana; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Subanti, Sri
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: This research aimed to find out: (1) which one gives better in mathematics learning achievement, learning models of Teams Games Tournament (TGT) with Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) approach, Teams Games Tournament (TGT) or conventional, (2) which one have better in mathematics learning achievement, students having climbers, campers or quitters of Adversity Quotient,  (3) in each learning model, the level of Adversity Quotient which one hve better mathematics learning achievement, students having climbers, campers or quitters of Adversity Quotient, (4) in each student’s level of Adversity Quotient which one gives better in mathematics learning achievement, learning models of TGT with RME approach, TGT or conventional. This research was a quasi-experimental research with 3 x 3 factorial design. The population of research was all students of Junior High School (SMP) in Grobogan. The samples were chosen by using stratified cluster random sampling. The instruments that were used to collect the data were the documentation of mathematics achievement, questionnaire of Adversity Quotient and test of mathematics achievement. The technique of analyzing the data was two-ways ANOVA with unbalanced cells. The result of research showed as follows: (1) learning model TGT with RME approach provided better learning achievement than TGT and conventional, learning TGT provided better learning achievement than conventional, (2) the students having climbers, campers, and quitters had equally mathematics learning achievement, (3) in each learning model, the students having climbers, campers, and quitters had equally mathematics learning achievement, (4) in each Adversity Quotient, learning model TGT with RME approach provided better learning achievement than TGT and conventional, learning TGT provided better learning achievement than conventional.Keywords: Teams Games Tournament (TGT), Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) approach, and Adversity Quotient (AQ)
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER (NHT) DAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DENGAN CONTEXTUAL TEACHING AND LEARNING (CTL) PADA MATERI PERSAMAAN DAN PERTIDAKSAMAAN LINEAR SATU VARIABEL DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN EMOSIONAL SISWA Winata, Rahmat; Budiyono, Budiyono; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 5 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: This research aimed to find out: (1) Which one give better mathematics’ learning achievement, learning model of NHT with CTL, TPS with CTL or direct learning, (2) Which one have better mathematics’ learning achievement, students who have high, medium or low. (3) On each learning model, which one give better achievement on each emotional intelligence. (4) On each level of emotional intelligence, which one give better mathematics’ learning achievement, learning model of NHT with CTL, TPS with CTL or direct learning. This research was the quasi-experimental research with 3×3 factorial design. The population of research was all students of Junior High School (SMP) in Karanganyar. The samples were 308 students; consist of 104 students in the first experimental class, 104 in the second experimental class, and 100 students in control class. The technique of analyzing the data was two-ways ANOVA with unbalanced cells. The result of research showed as follows. (1) The NHT with CTL given learning achievement as good as the TPS with CTL. NHT and TPS with CTL provided better learning achievement than the direct learning, (2) The students with high emotional intelligence had better learning achievement than those with medium and low emotional intelligence. The students with medium emotional intelligence had better learning achievement than did those with low emotional intelligence, (3) Students taught by using NHT and TPS with CTL, students with high emotional intelligence had learning achievement as good as the medium emotional intelligence. The students with high emotional intelligence had better learning achievement than the students with low emotional intelligence. The students with medium emotional intelligence had learning achievement as good as the students with low emotional intelligence. Students taught by using direct learning had equal learning achievement in each level of emotional intelligence, (4) Students with high emotional intelligence taught by using the NHT with CTL had learning achievement as good as the TPS with CTL. Students with high emotional intelligence taught by using the NHT and TPS with CTL had better learning achievement than the direct learning. Students with medium and low emotional intelligence had equal learning achievement in each learning model.Keywords: NHT with CTL, TPS with CTL, learning achievement, emotional intelligence.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE JIGSAW DENGAN PENDEKATAN PROBLEM POSING DAN TIPE JIGSAW TERHADAP KEMAMPUAN MENYELESAIKAN SOAL CERITA PADA PECAHAN DITINJAU DARI TINGKAT PERCAYA DIRI SISWA KELAS VII SMP/MTs DI KOTA METRO LAMPUNG Kusumaningtyas, Wahyu; Budiyono, Budiyono; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 6 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: This research aimed to find out: (1) which one is better in giving the mathematical word problem solving ability among learning models of jigsaw with problem posing approach, learning models of jigsaw, or direct instructional models, (2) which one is better in giving the mathematical word problem solving ability among students’ level of confidence, students having high, medium or low level, (3) in each level of confidence, which one is better in giving the mathematical word problem solving ability among learning models of jigsaw with problem posing approach, learning models of jigsaw, or direct instructional models and (4) in each learning models, which one is better in giving the mathematical word problem solving ability among students’ level of confidence, students having high, medium or low level. This research was a quasi-experimental research with 3×3 factorial design. The population of the research was all grade VII students of Junior High School (SMP) in Metro, Lampung in academic year 2013/2014. The samples were chosen by using stratified cluster random sampling. The instruments that were used to collect the data were the test and questionnaire of student’s level of confidence. The technique of analyzing the data was two-ways ANOVA with unbalanced cells. The results of research showed as follows. (1) Learning models of jigsaw with problem posing approach had mathematical word problem solving ability as good as learning models of jigsaw, learning models of jigsaw with problem posing approach had better mathematical word problem solving ability than direct instructional models, and learning models of jigsaw had mathematical word problem solving ability as good as direct instructional models. (2) The students having high level of confidence had mathematical word problem solving ability as good as those having medium level of confidence. The students having high level of confidence had better mathematical word problem solving ability than those having low level of confidence. The students having medium level of confidence had mathematical word problem solving ability as good as those having low level of confidence. (3) In each level of confidence, learning models of jigsaw with problem posing approach had better mathematical word problem solving ability than direct instructional models. (4) In each learning models, the students having high level of confidence had better mathematical word problem solving ability than those having low level of confidence.Keywords : Jigsaw with Problem Posing Approach, Direct Instructional Models,    Mathematical Word Problem Solving Ability, Confidence.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE CO-OP CO-OP, DISCOVERY LEARNING DAN PBL DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK SISWA KELAS VIII SMP NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN NGAWI PADA MATERI BANGUN RUANG SISI DATAR DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS BELAJAR MATEMATIKA Kurniawan, Wahyu; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Slamet, Isnandar
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 8 (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 effect among learning models used cooperative learning of Co-op Co-op type with scientific approach, discovery learning (DL) with scientific approach, and  the problem based learning (PBL) with scientific approach. The research method was quasi experimental. The population was all students of grade VIII State Junior High School of district Ngawi Year of 2014/2015. Sampling was taken by stratified cluster random sampling technique. The hypothesis test used two way analysis of variance with unbalanced cell. The results of the research were as follows. (1) The mathematics learning achievement of students treated with Co-op Co-op type of cooperative learning model with scientific approach was better than that of those treated with DL learning model with scientific approach and those treated with PBL learning model with scientific approach, while that of those treated with DL learning model with scientific approach was as good as that of those treated with PBL learning model with scientific approach. (2) The mathematics learning achievement of students with high learning creativity was better than that of those with medium and low ones, while that of those with medium was better than that of those with low one. (3) In Co-op Co-op type of cooperative learning model with scientific approach, the learning achievements of the students with high, medium and low learning creativities were the same. In DL learning model with scientific approach, the students with high learning creativity had mathematics learning achievement as good as those with those with medium one, while those with high and medium learning creativities had better learning achievement than those with low on. In PBL learning model with scientific approach, the students with high and low creativities had mathematics learning achievement as good as that of those with medium one, while the students with high learning creativity had better learning achievement than those with low one. (4) The students with high and medium learning creativities treated with Co-op Co-op type of cooperative learning model with scientific approach had mathematics learning achievement as good as those treated with DL with scientific approach and those treated with PBL with scientific approach. The students with low learning creativity treated with Co-op Co-op type of cooperative learning model with scientific approach had mathematics learning achievement better than those treated with DL with scientific approach, while those treated with Co-op Co-op type of cooperative learning model with scientific approach had mathematics learning achievement with scientific approach and those treated with DL with scientific approach had learning achievement as good as that of those treated with PBL with scientific approach.Keywords: Co-op Co-op, DL, PBL, scientific approach, student learning creativity

Page 26 of 35 | Total Record : 347

 24   25   26   27   28 

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