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
 28   29   30   31   32 
EKSPERIMENTASI PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATKA MENGGUNAKAN MODEL PEMBELAJARAN THINK PAIR SHARE DENGAN PENDEKATAN PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA REALISTIK PADA POKOK BAHASAN DIMENSI TIGA DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN SPASIAL SISWA Tardi, Tardi; Budiyono, Budiyono; Iswahyudi, Gatut
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 9 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: This research was aimed at searching and finding: 1) the most effective mathematics learning model among TPS learning model with PMR, TPS learning model, and direct learning model, 2) the level of student’s spatial intelligence having the highest achievement among students with high, average, and low spatial intelligence, 3) the most effective learning model among TPS learning model with PMR, TPS learning model, and direct learning model towards student’s achievement on each level of spatial intelligence, and 4) the level of students having the highest achievement in every learning model. This was a quasy-experimental research with a 3x3 factorial design. The population was students of grade X of state senior high school in Surakarta in 2013/2014. Stratified random sampling and cluster random sampling techniques were applied. The samples in this research were: 1) experiment group 1, consisting of 91 students; 2) experiment group 2, consisting of 90 students; 3) control group, consisting of 99. The data collecting instruments were student’s spatial intelligence test and achievement test in the form of multiple choices. Balance test with unbalanced one-way anova test, analysis prerequisite tests (normality test with Liliefors test and homogenity test with Bartlett test) and hipothesis test (unbalanced  two-way anova test) were conducted. It can be concluded that: 1) TPS model with PMR is more effective towards student’s achievement than TPS model and direct model, and TPS model is as effective as direct model towards student’s achievement; 2) students with high spatial intelligence gain higher achievement than those with average and low spatial intelligence, and students with average spatial intelligence gain higher achievement than those with low spatial intelligence; 3) to students with high and average spatial intelligence, TPS model with PMR, TPS model and direct model give the same achievement. For students with  low spatial intelligence, TPS model with PMR and TPS model give the same achievement, but TPS model with PMR gain higher achievement than those with direct model, and TPS model and direct model give the same achievement; and 4) dealing with TPS model with PMR, students with high and average spatial intelligence gain the same of achievement, but students with high spatial intelligence gain higher achievement than those with low spatial intelligence, and students with average and low spatial intelligence gain the same of achievement, while dealing with with TPS model, students with high and average spatial intelligence gain the same of achievement but students with high spatial intelligence gain higher than those with low spatial intelligence, while students with average spatial intelligence gain higher achievement than those with low spatial intelligence, and dealing with direct model, students with high spatial intelligence gain higher achievement than those with average and low spatial intelligence, but students with average and low spatial intelligence gain the same of achievement.Key Words: learning model, TPS, PMR, spatial intelligence 
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DENGAN PROBLEM POSING PADA POKOK BAHASAN PELUANG DITINJAU DARI ADVERSITY QUOTIENT (AQ) SISWA KELAS XI SMK DI KABUPATEN BOYOLALI Hidayat Bahktiar; Budi Usodo; Riyadi Riyadi
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: This research aimed to find out: (1) which one gives better in mathematics learning achievement, learning model of Think Pair Share (TPS) with Problem Posing, Think Pair Share (TPS) 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, which one have 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 model of TPS with Problem Posing, TPS or conventional. This research was a quasi-experimental research with 3 x 3 factorial design. The population of the research was all students class XI majors group technology, health and agriculture of SMK in Boyolali. 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 of TPS with Problem Posing provided better learning achievement than model of TPS and conventional, learning model of TPS provided better learning achievement than conventional, (2) the students having climbers and campers had same achievement, and the students having climbers and campers had better  achievement than those having quitters, (3) in each learning model, the students having climbers and campers had the same achievement, and the students having climbers and campers had better achievement than those having quitters, (4) in each Adversity Quotient, learning model of TPS with Problem Posing provided better learning achievement than TPS and conventional, learning model of TPS provided better learning achievement than conventional.Keywords: Think Pair Share (TPS), Problem Posing, and Adversity Quotient (AQ)
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF THINK PAIR SHARE DAN TEAM ASSISTED INDIVIDUALIZATION PADA MATERI TRIGONOMETRI DITINJAU DARI MINAT BELAJAR MATEMATIKA SISWA SMK DI KABUPATEN PONOROGO TAHUN PELAJARAN 2011/2012 Budiastuti, Siti Amirah; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Triyanto, Triyanto
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 objectives of this research are to investigate: (1) wich learning model of Think Pair Share (TPS), Team Assisted Individualization (TAI), or conventional learning model results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics, (2) which learning interest of the high learning interest, the moderate learning interest, and the low learning interest results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics,(3) in the students with the high, moderate, and low learning interests, wich learning model of Think Pair Share (TPS), Team Assisted Individualization (TAI), and conventional learning model results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics. This research used the quasi experimental research method with the factorial design of 3x3. The population of the research were the students of Vocational High School (SMK) in Ponorogo regency on Academic Year 2011/2012. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique. It was conducted at SMK 1 of Ponorogo, SMK Bakti of Ponorogo, and SMK Sore 1 of Ponorogo. The samples included two experimental classes and one control class of each of the schools. The size of the sample was 275 students consisted of 84 students in the first experimental class, 105 sudents in the second experimental class and 86 students in control class. The data of the research were gathered through mathematics achievement tes and quetionary of learning interest. The data was analyzed by using two-way analysis of variance with.The results of the reseach are as follows: (1) both TPS and TAI result in the same good learning achievement in Mathematics, and result in a better learning achievement than the conventional one does; (2) the students with the higher learning interest have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those with the moderate learning interest and the low learning interest, but the students with the moderat learning interest have the same learning achievement in Mathematics those with the low learning interest; (3) in the students with the high, moderat, and low learning interest, both TPS and TAI result in the same good learning achievement in Mathematics, and result in a better learning achievement than the conventional one does.Key words: Think Pair Share, Team Assisted Individualization, Conventional, Learning Interest
PROSES BERPIKIR KREATIF DALAM PEMECAHAN MASALAH MATEMATIKA DITINJAU DARI TIPE KEPRIBADIAN DIMENSI MYER-BRIGGS SISWA KELAS VIII MTs NW SURALAGA LOMBOK TIMUR TAHUN PELAJARAN 2013/2014 Aziz, Abdul; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; 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: This study aimed at describing the process of creative thinking of the eight grade students of MTs NW Suralaga East Lombok  in the academic year of 2013/2014, who had personality type based on the Myer-Briggs personality dimensions, namely rational personality type (STR) and guardian personality type (STG) in the mathematics problems solving on Wallas steps, namely preparation, incubation, illumination, and verification. The approach used descriptive qualitative approach in a case study. The data collection technique was conducted by using task based interview. The result showed that the procces of creative thingking on: (1) the STR students, namely: (a) the preparation, the students read APS (assignment problem solving) silently, observed the instructions and information carefully, and mentioned the known and the asked things in  reading once APS; (b) incubation, the students tend to be silent for a moment, the students do a contemplation activities, planned the problem solving, and took a long time to bring up the idea; (c) illumination, the students started by identifying the contained information in the APS, wrote how to solve the problem and continued by explaining the procedure of problem solving, the students established the steps to resolve the problem and got the idea by developing the idea of the previous answers; (d) verification, the students expressed orally the re-examination procedure of the answer, wrote the re-examination procedure, explained the re-examination procedure and explained the procedure again orally. (2) The STG students, namely: (a) the preparation, the students read the APS silently, and in a loud voice, mentioned the current issues in the APS, wrote the problems on the answer sheet, mentioned the known and the asked things of APS after a given follow-up questions; (b) incubation, the students tend to be silent, the students do a contemplation activities and arranged the plan of problem-solving when they were calm; (c) illumination, the students identified the information on APS and determined the attributes that were used to solve the problem, established the steps to resolve the problem, described the problem solving procedures, solved the problems by developing the idea from the previous idea; (d) verification, the students revealed and explained the re-examine procedure of the answer orally, wrote the re-examination procedure of the answer, observed and re-checked the problem solving that had been done.Keywords: Creative Thinking, Problem Solving, and Personality Type
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN THINK TALK WRITE (TTW) DAN MODEL PEMBELAJARAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK PADA MATERI BILANGAN DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN LOGIS MATEMATIS SISWA KELAS VII SMP NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN BLORA Zuhdha Basofi Nugroho; Budiyono Budiyono; Sri Subanti
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 the learning models on learning achievement viewed from the logical mathematical intelligence of the students. This research was a quasi-experimental research with a 3x3 factorial design. The population of the research was the seven class students of Junior High School at Blora regency on academic year 2014/2015 and the samples were students from SMP Negeri 2 Blora, SMP Negeri 1 Ngawen, and SMP Negeri 1 Japah which was taken by using stratified cluster random sampling technique. The data analysis technique used was unbalanced two ways analysis of variance. Based on the data analysis, it was concluded as follows. 1) TTW with scientific approach gave better achievement than TPS, and classical with scientific approach TPS with scientific approach gave better achievement than classical with scientific approach. 2) The students with high logical matematical intelligence better achievement than the students with medium and low logical matematical intelligence. The students with medium logical matematical intelligence better achievement than the students with low logical matematical intelligence. 3) At the students with high and medium logical matematical intelligence, TTW, TPS, and classical with scientific approach gave the same achievement. At the students with low logical matematical intelligence TTW and TPS with scientific approach gave the same achievement, TTW and TPS with scientific approach gave better achievement than classical scientific learning model. 4) In TTW with scientific approach, students with high and medium logical matematical intelligence had the same achievement, students with medium and low logical matematical intelligence had the same achievement, and students with high logical matematical intelligence had better achievement than students with low logical matematical intelligence. In TPS with scientific approach students with high logical matematical intelligence had better achievement than students with medium and low logical matematical intelligence, and students with medium and low logical matematical intelligence had the same achievement. In classical with scientific approach, students with high and medium logical matematical intelligence had the same achievement, students with high and medium logical matematical intelligence had better achievement than students with low logical matematical intelligence.Keywords:  Think Pair Share, Think Talk Write, Classical learning model, Scientific Approach, Logical Matematical Intelligence, Achievement.
PENGEMBANGAN PERANGKAT PEMBELAJARAN DENGAN DESAIN DIDAKTIK UNTUK MENGURANGI HAMBATAN BELAJAR SISWA PADA TOPIK SEGIEMPAT DALAM PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA SMP Mustika, Aulia Musla; Budiyono, Budiyono; Riyadi, Riyadi
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 purpose of this study were to: (1) describe the student’s learning obstacle and related topics quadrilateral learning device that could reduce the learning obstacle, especially on quadrilateral, (2) develop the prototype of learning devices with didactical design on the topic quadrilateral, and (3) test the effectiveness of learning device which were developed in didactical  design on the topic quadrilateral.The research method used was Research and Development with the steps of research: (1) preliminary research, (2) product design, (3) product validation, (4) revised product, (5) preliminary field testing, (6) main product revision; (7) main field testing; (8) revised product, and (9) effectiveness test. The results of the research were as follows.(1) Type of learning obstaclerelated to quadrilateral were: (a) learning obstaclerelated to the context information on the variation of matter; (b) learning obstaclerelated to the concept image of the base, height and other components of quadrilateral;(c) learningobstacle related to the relationship between the perimeter and area among the type of?aquadrilateral; (d) learning obstacle related to students' ability to solve the problems about quadrilateral which should be constructed in advance; and (e) learning obstacle related to the connection among the perimeter and area of??a quadrilateral without her mathematical concepts. Based on the learning obstacles, drafted a learning device that consists of a lesson plans, work sheets and response prediction and didactical antisipation. (2) Identification of learning obstacle used as a reference to develop learning device. Learning device then validated and revised for a preliminary field testing. In the preliminary field testing, there were still many students who made mistakes in solving the given problems. It was pointed out as learning obstacle. Analysis based on observation sheets, questionnaires, tests and interviews indicated that the device was too difficult for the students.. However, after the revision tested in the main field testing, the students began to decrease learning obstacles. (4) Test showed that the achievement of students who used the didactical learning devise better than student achievement with conventional learning. Keywords: development, learning obstacle, didacticdesign, quadrilateral.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN PROBLEM BASED INSTRUCTION DAN RECIPROCAL TEACHING PADA MATERI BANGUN RUANG DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA KELAS VIII SMP NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN WONOGIRI TAHUN PELAJARAN 2013/2014 Mahendrawan, Ersam; Usodo, Budi; Riyadi, Riyadi
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: This research aimed to know: (1) which one of the learning models gave a better achievement between problem based instruction, reciprocal teaching, or conventional, (2) which one of the students with types of learning style had a better achievement between students with visual, auditory, or kinesthetic, (3) at each learning style types, which one of the learning models gave a better achievement between problem based instruction, reciprocal teaching, or conventional, (4) at each the learning models, which one of the students with types of learning style had a better achievement between students with visual, auditory, or kinesthetic. The population of the research was the eighth class students of Junior High School at Wonogiri regency on academic year 2013/2014 and the sample was students from SMP Negeri 1 Slogohimo, SMP Negeri 1 Jatipurno and SMP Negeri 4 Jatisrono which was taken by using stratified cluster random sampling technique. This was a quasi-experimental research with a 3x3 factorial design. The data analysis technique used was unbalanced two ways analysis of variance. Based on the data analysis, it was concluded as follows. 1) Problem based instruction gave better achievement than reciprocal teaching, conventional gave the same achievement as problem based instruction and reciprocal teaching, 2) The students with visual had better achievement than the students with auditory and kinesthetic, the students with auditory had better achievement than students with kinesthetic, 3) At the students with visual, reciprocal teaching gave the same achievement as problem based instruction and conventional, problem based instruction gave better achievement than conventional. At the students with auditory, problem based instruction gave better achievement than reciprocal teaching, conventional gave better achievement than reciprocal teaching and gave the same achievement as problem based instruction. At the students with kinesthetic, problem based instruction gave the same achievement as reciprocal teaching and conventional, 4) In reciprocal teaching, the students with visual had better achievement than the students with auditory, the students with kinesthetic had the same achievement as the students with visual and auditory. In problem based instruction, the students with visual had the same achievement as the students with auditory and had better achievement than the students with kinesthetic, the students with auditory had better achievement than the students with kinesthetic. In conventional model, the students with visual had the same achievement as the students with auditory and kinesthetic.Keywords: Problem Based Instruction, Reciprocal Teaching, Learning Style, Achievement.
Analisis Proses Pembelajaran Matematika Berdasarkan Kurikulum 2013 pada Materi Pokok Peluang Kelas X SMA Negeri 1 Surakarta Adi Wahyu Kuncara; Imam Sujadi; Riyadi Riyadi
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 aims of research was to describe the teacher understanding of 2013 curriculum-based learning process and assessment, learning process and assessment based on the 2013 curriculum  in main subject of probability in classroom X SMA Negeri 1 Surakarta. This research used the qualitative method with the case study approach, by deeply studying  the learning activities so as to describe the learning process taking place in the mathematics learning, especially the material of probability. The subject of research was mathematics teacher of the tenth grade of SMA Negeri 1 Surakarta with the criterion of having attended the training about 2013 curriculum. The data in this study were: (i) teacher’s understanding of the learning and assessment process based on  2013 curriculum (ii) mathematics learning process that imparting knowledge, attitudes, and skills with scientific approach (iii) the assessment process of knowledge, attitudes, and skills. Step analysis of the data in the study carried out in three stages, namely data reduction, data presentation, and withdrawal conclusion. The results of this study are as follows. (i) The learning process in curriculum 2013 was centered on the students, and the teacher merely functions as a facilitator. In addition, the learning process was not the only aspect of the knowledge imparted to students but the learning process in 2013 curriculum inculcate attitudes and skills aspects as well. According to teacher, assessment process using the aspects of knowledge, it can be a matter of testing and instrument description, aspects of attitude by observing and instrument in the form of sheets of observations, as well as aspects of skills with the practice tests or portfolios and instrument in the form of a rubric. (ii) Observed activities carried out by asking the students to listen to the explanation given by the teachers. The questioning activities carried out by asking questions to the students related to the material being studied. Information gathering activities that occur are students reading books and worksheets to answer the question or questions given by teacher. In this information gathering activities of teachers instill active attitude to the students. Inform process activities occur that students use information obtained from books and worksheets to answer the questions given by the teacher. On inform process activities, teachers inculcate cooperation and responsibility to the students. Communicated activities carried out by asking students to write the results of group discussions in class. (iii) Knowledge assessment process conducted by giving a quiz to the student at the end of learning and the instrument that is used in the form of a description. The attitude assessment process was carried out during the learning process. Teachers assess students attitudes to the observation technique. Skills assessment process were carried out during the learning process. Teachers assess students skills when communicating with the activities of the students and see the results of the discussion by looking at the results of the quiz given to students.Keywords : mathematics learning process, scientific approach, assessment process, curriculum 2013
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE STAD DAN TGT DENGAN PENDEKATAN KONTEKSTUAL TERHADAP PRESTASI BELAJAR DAN ASPEK AFEKTIF MATEMATIKA SISWA DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN MAJEMUK Fadila, Abi; Budiyono, Budiyono; Riyadi, Riyadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 1 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The objectives of this research were to investigate: (1) whose learning achievement and affective aspect of Mathematics are better between the students with the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with contextual approach and those with the cooperative learning model of the TGT type with contextual approach; (2) whose learning achievement and affective aspect of Mathematics are better among the students with mathematical logical intelligence, visual intelligence, kinesthetic intelligence, and interpersonal intelligence; and (3) whether or not there is an interaction in each category of the cooperative learning models and the intelligence types on the learning achievement and affective aspect of Mathematics. This research used the quasi experimental research method. Its population was all of the students in Grade VII of State Junior Secondary Schools of Sukoharjo regency in Academic Year 2012/2013. The samples of the research consisted of 141 students, and they were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling. The data of the research were gathered through test of learning achievement and questionnaire affective aspect. The proposed hypotheses of the research were tested by using a two-way MANOVA with unbalance cells at the significance level of 5%. The results of the research are as follows 1) The learning achievement in Mathematics of the students of the TGT with contextual approach is better than that STAD with contextual approach, but the affective aspect of Mathematics of the students with TGT with contextual approach is as good as that STAD with contextual approach; 2) The learning achievement in Mathematics of the students with the mathematical logical intelligence is as good as those of the students with the kinesthetic intelligence, interpersonal intelligence but better than visual intelligence, the learning achievement in Mathematics of the students with the kinesthetic intelligence is better than interpersonal intelligence. The affective aspect of Mathematics of the students with the mathematical logical intelligence is as good as that of the students with the kinesthetic intelligence, but better than visual intelligence and interpersonal intelligence, and the affective aspect of Mathematics of the students with the visual intelligence is as good as that of the students with the interpersonal intelligence. 3) There is no any interaction of effect of the cooperative learning models and the multiple intelligences on the learning achievement in Mathematics and the affective aspect of Mathematics.Keywords: STAD, TGT, multiple intelligences, learning achievement, and affective aspect.
PROFIL PEMAHAMAN SISWA TERHADAP LUAS DAN KELILING BANGUN DATAR YANG DIGUNAKAN DALAM MEMECAHKAN MASALAH MATEMATIKA DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN EMOSIONAL ( Penelitian Pada Kelas VII MTsN Ketanggung Ngawi Semester Genap Tahun Pelajaran 2013/2014 ) Indayani, Sri; 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 :  Area and perimeter in plane gometry are one of the subjects in the study of mathematics in class VII of SMP / MTs. The mathematics learning system in Indonesia  generally is not emphasized in solving the problem, but on procedural matters. Students are trained to memorize formulas, but less understood and mastered its application in solving a problem. This study aimed to describe the profile of students' understanding of area and perimeter which are used in solving mathematical problems in terms of the level of emotional intelligence. The big difference in emotional intelligence on each student, it is possible to affect the level of student understanding. This research was conducted in class VII MTsN Ketanggung Ngawi. Research subjects consisted of 3 students were selected from the results of the questionnaire of emotional intelligence, which is one students with a high level of emotional intelligence, one students with the level of emotional intelligence is and one student with a low level of emotional intelligence. This study is a descriptive qualitative research. Data collection in this study was done by using a questionnaire, the results of the written test and interview-based tasks. The validity of the data is done by time triangulation. The main instrument in this study is the researchers themselves who aim to seek and collect data directly from the data source, and Insrument help in this research is the emotional intelligence questionnaire instruments, sheet student comprehension task, and interview guides. The results showed that students with high emotional intelligence and are entered on a relational level of understanding, and students with low entry level of emotional intelligence on the level of instrumental understanding. Keywords: student understanding, problem solving,  emotional intelligence

Page 30 of 35 | Total Record : 347

 28   29   30   31   32 

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