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
 30   31   32   33   34 
EKSPERIMENTASI PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA DENGAN MODEL THINK TALK WRITE (TTW) DAN MISSOURI MATHEMATICS PROJECT (MMP) DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA KELAS VII SMP NEGERI DI KABUPATEN PACITAN TAHUN AJARAN 2012/2013 Sutarman, Sutarman; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Triyanto, Triyanto
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 objectives of the research were to find out: (1) which one was improving better the students mathematics learning achievement, Think-Talk-Write (TTW) or Missouri Mathematics Project (MMP) and Conventional Learning model, (2) which one was providing better to mathematics learning achievement, the students who used visual, auditory, or kinesthetic learning style (3) who the students were provided to be better in mathematics learning achievement by applied the TTW, MMP, and Conventional model on each learning style. The research method used was a quasi-experimental research with 3x3 factorial design. The population of the research were the students of junior high schools in Pacitan regency in the school in year of 2012/2013. The sampling technique used was stratified cluster random sampling. The were 275 students who were divided into three groups. The groups devided into the experiment I, experiment II, and control class. Experiment I was consisted of 92 students, experiment II was consisted of 92 students, and control class was consisted of 91 students. The instruments used to collect the data were the students learning styles questionnaire, the students achievement in mathematics and documentation. The technique of data used was an unbalanced two ways analysis of variance. The results of the reseach were as follows: (1) the mathematics learning achievement to the students who were given the TTW learning model were as same as to the students were given the MMP learning model, but they were better than the students, learning achievement who were taught by the conventional learning model, The students learning achievement in the MMP learning model were as same as to the students learning achievement in the conventional learning model. (2) the mathematics learning achievement of the students by visual learning style were better than the students learning achievment by auditory or kinesthetic learning style, while the students by auditory learning style had their learning achievement as same as with the students by kinesthetic learning style. (3) the mathematics learning achievement to the students on each learning style, students were given the TTW learning model had shown the same learning achievement to students were given the MMP learning model, but they were better achievements when compared with student who were taught the conventional learning model, while the students who were given the MMP learning model has achievement as well as student who were given the conventional learning model.Keywords:     TTW learning model, MMP learning model, conventional learning model, learning style, mathematics learning achievement.
MAMPUAN KOMUNIKASI MATEMATIS DALAM PEMECAHAN MASALAH MATEMATIKA SESUAI DENGAN GAYA KOGNITIF PADA SISWA KELAS IX SMP NEGERI 1 SURAKARTA TAHUN PELAJARAN 2012/2013 Pratiwi, Dona Dinda; Sujadi, Imam; Pangadi, Pangadi
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 purpose of this research was describing the ability of mathematical communication in solving the mathematics problem. This research was include of study case situation analysis research. The subjects of this research consisted of four students of Class IXb of the ninth grade SMPN 1 Surakarta in the second semester of the academic year 2012/2013.  They were two students who had field dependence cognitive style and two students who had field independence cognitive style. The subjects were taken by using the purposive sampling technique. The data of this research were gathered through think aloud method. The data were then analyzed by using the technique with the procedureas follows: (1) the data were classified on the basis of the indicators of mathematical communication after the data had been obtained from the first and the second collections; (2) the data were presented in table form; and (3) the conclusions were drawn. The validity of the data was conducted by using time triangulation. The result of this research were analyzed by using constant comparison in which subject in i (i= 1, 2) with the j (j= 1, 2) cognitive style which was already valid as well compared with subject in k (k= 1, 2) with the the j (j= 1, 2) cognitive style which was already valid as well. The equal ability of mathematical communication was made the main finding wheares the different ability of mathematical communication was made the other finding. The result of this research valid because of the dependability proved. The ability of mathematical communication of the students with the field dependence cognitive style is different from that of those with the field independence cognitive style. The students with the field dependence cognitive style can communicate the ideas in written way well but they have difficulties in communicating ideas in spoken way as well as inclination to receive information without reorganizing it in such a way that the problem-solving ideas presented cannot reveal the actual problem solution. Meanwhile, the students with the field independence cognitive style can communicate the ideas well in both spoken and written ways and process as well as reorganize information in such a way that the problem-solving ideas presented can reveal the actual problem solution. Keywords: Mathematical Communication. Problem Solving. Cognitive Style.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN THINK TALK WRITE (TTW) DAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) PADA POKOK BAHASAN DIMENSI TIGA DITINJAU DARI KESULITAN BELAJAR SISWA KELAS X SMA NEGERI DI KABUPATEN MAGETAN TAHUN PELAJARAN 2012/2013 Susmono, Susmono; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Mardiyana, Mardiyana
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 objectives of this research were to find out: (1) which learning model of the TTW, TPS or conventional learning results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics; (2) which students with learning difficulties (low, medium or high) have a better learning achievement in Mathematics; (3) in each students learning difficulties, which learning model of TTW, TPS or conventional learning results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics; and (4) in each learning model, which students learning difficulties (low, medium or high) results in a better learning achievement in Mathematics.This research used the quasi experimental research method with the factorial design of 3x3. Its population was all of the students in Grade X of State Senior High Schools in Magetan regency. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique. The samples of the researh consisted of 232 students; 82 students belonged to experiment class one, 78 students belonged to experiment class two and 72 students belonged to control class. The data of the research were gathered through multiple choice test of learning achievement and questionnaire of students learning difficulties. The data of the research were analyzed by using the unbalanced two-way analysis of variance at the significance level of 5%. The results of the research showed that: (1) the TTW and TPS learning models result in the same good achievement in mathematics, the TTW and conventional result in the same good achievement, but TPS result in better than the conventional learning model; (2) The students with low learning difficulties result in better than with the high learning difficulties, the students with the low learning difficulties result in the same good with the medium learning difficulties, the students with the medium learning difficulties result in the same good with the students with high learning difficulties; (3) ) in each students learning difficulties, the TTW and TPS result in the same good learning achievement in mathematics, TTW and conventional result in the same good learning achievement in mathematics, TPS learning model result in  better learning achievement than conventional; (4) in each learning model, the student with low learning difficulties result in  better learning achievement than with high learning difficulties, the students with low learning difficulties result in the same good learning achievement with the medium learning difficulties, that with medium learning difficulties result in the same good learning achievement with the high learning difficulties.Keywords: learning model, TTW, TPS, conventional, students learning diffulties.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN THINK PAIR SHARE DENGAN PENDEKATAN KONTEKSTUAL PADA MATERI LOGARITMA DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN MATEMATIS LOGIS SISWA KELAS X PADA SEKOLAH MENENGAH ATAS DI KABUPATEN CILACAP TAHUN PELAJARAN 2012/2013 Biyarti, Tunggu; 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 were to know: (1) which of learning model gave a better learning mathematics result, learning model Think Pair Share (TPS), Think Pair Share with contextual approachment (TPSPK) or direct learning; (2) for each level of student’s logical mathematical intellegence, which of learning model gave a better learning mathematics result, learning model TPS, TPSPK or direct learning (PL). This research was quasi experimental research with 3 x 3 factorial design. The population in this research was senior high school students grade X in Cilacap. Sample was taken using stratified cluster random sampling technique. Study sample were the students of SMA Negeri 1 Binangun, SMA Negeri 1 Kroya and SMA Negeri Adipala. Instruments used to gather data were logical mathematical intellegence test and mathematics learning result test on the subject of logarithm. Both instruments were tested first before they were used. The test method included content validity, power, difficulty level and reliability. Testing of hypothesis used unbalanced two-ways analysis of variance using significance level of. Before doing the hypothesis test, the pre-condition test for variance analysis was done. The pre-condition test included population normality test using Lillieforce method and population variance homogeneity test using Bartlett method. Balance test toward mathematics initial ability data using unbalanced one-way analysis of variance. Based on hypothesis test, the conclusion were as follows: (1) learning models of TPS and TPSPK gave equally good results in learning mathematics, but learning model of TPS gave learning mathematics result better than direct learning one, while learning models of TPSPK and direct learning one gave equally good results in learning mathematics; (2) for each level of student’s logical mathematical intellegence, the three learning models, TPS, TPSPK and direct learning one gave equally good results in learning mathematics.Keyword: TPS, Contextual Approachment, Logical Mathematical Intellegence, Learning Mathematics Result.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE JIGSAW DENGAN GUIDED DISCOVERY LEARNING PADA MATERI BANGUN RUANG SISI DATAR DITINJAU DARI LOCUS OF CONTROL Widodo, Widodo; Sujadi, Imam; Riyadi, Riyadi
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 the research were to determine the effect of learning models on learning achievement viewed from the students locus of control (LOC). The learning models compared were Jigsaw by using Guided Discovery Learning (GDL), jigsaw and direct learning. The type of this research were aquasi-experimental research with the factorial design 3x3. The population were the students of the VIII class of SMP Negeri Ponorogo Regency in the academic year of 2013/2014. The samples of the research consisted of 263 students and were taken through stratified cluster random sampling. The proposed hypothesis of the research were tested by using the two-way analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The conclusions of this research were as follows. (1) Jigsaw-GDL provided better learning achievement than jigsaw and direct instruction, while jigsaw provided better learning achievement than direct instruction, (2) the students with high LOC had better learning achievement than medium and low LOC, students with medium LOC had better learning achievement than low LOC, (3) in students with high LOC, the use of jigsaw-GDL provided learning achievement as good as jigsaw, the use of Jigsaw provided learning achievement as good as direct instruction, the use of Jigsaw-GDL provided the better learning achievement than direct instruction, in students with medium and low LOC, there were no difference in learning achievement in each learning model, (4) in Jigsaw-GDL learning model, there were no difference in learning achievement between students with high LOC and medium LOC, and both of them had better learning achievement than students with low LOC, in Jigsaw and direct learning model, there were no difference in learning achievement in each level of LOC.Keywords:  Jigsaw-GDL, Jigsaw,  Locus of Control, and Learning Achievement
PROSES INTEGRASI SIKAP DALAM PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA SMP BERDASARKAN KURIKULUM 2013 (Studi Kasus pada Proses Pembelajaran Kelas VII SMP Al Azhar Syifa Budi Solo Semester Ganjil Tahun Pelajaran 2013/2014) Sulaiman, Sulaiman; Sujadi, Imam; Riyadi, Riyadi
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 objective of this research was to describe the integration process and attitude assessment done by the teacher in mathematics learning process at seventh grade of SMP Al Azhar Syifa Budi Solo. This qualitative research was a case study. The subjects of this research were a teacher and three seventh grade students of SMP Al Azhar Syifa Budi Solo. The data of integration process was in the form of activity within mathematics learning process supported by the subjects’ statement. Data analyzing process began by assessing all data available in the recorder, which includes the learning process and interview. There were three steps in analyzing the data: data reduction, data presentation, and drawing conclusion. Information of attitude assessment was in the form of information gathering activity conducted by the teacher to the students. The data were obtained from the transcription of recorded interview and learning process. Validation techniques used were perseverance maintenance and time triangulation. The results of this research are as follows: 1) Integration process of attitude in mathematics learning at seventh grade of SMP Al Azhar Budi Syifa Solo based on Curriculum 2013. During observation learning process, the teacher asks the students to observe objects and events in daily life related to mathematics learning topic. During question and answer learning process, the teacher gives questions to the students and provides them chance to ask questions. During information gathering process, the students were asked to discuss a certain concept, to read a book and to discuss it, to examine, to explain, and to solve a problem. During associating learning process, the teacher asks the students to analyze, to associate, and to define in details the learning topic. Lastly, during communicating learning process, the teacher helps the students to summarize the material comprehensively. 2) Process of attitude assessment during mathematics learning at seventh grade of SMP Al Azhar Syifa Budi Solo are: the process of curiosity assessment was conducted by the teacher when the students solved the problems related to the materials; the process of responsibility assessment was conducted by the teacher when the students solved the problems and when the students present the result of their discussion in front of the class. The assessment of curiosity and responsibility were conducted by giving checklist mark on the attitude observation sheet.Key Words: integration process of attitude, attitude assessment process, curiosity,responsibility, curriculum 2013
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN TWO STAY TWO STRAY (TSTS) DAN LEARNING CYCLE 5E (LC5E) PADA MATERI TRIGONOMETRI DITINJAU DARI AKTIVITAS BELAJAR SISWA SMA/MA NEGERI DI KABUPATEN KARANGANYAR Nurcahyo, Andriawan; Sujadi, Imam; Riyadi, Riyadi
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: The objectives of research was to determine the effect of learning models on  learning achievement viewed from the students learning activities. The learning models compared were two stray two stay (TSTS), learning cycle 5E (LC5E) and direct learning. This research method was quasi – experimental using the factorial design 3x3. The Population of this research was all students in the tenth grade of High School / MA in Karanganyar in the academic year of 2013/2014. The Sampling was done by stratified cluster random sampling. The total samples in this research were 340 students (113 students for TSTS class, 113 students for LC5E class and 114 students for direct learning model). The proposed hypothesis of the research were tested by using the two-way analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The conclusions of this research were as follow: (1) cooperative learning model TSTS, LC5E and direct learning model have the same achievement in  trigonometry. (2) students having high learning activities of mathematics study have the same achievement with those having medium learning activities, students having high learning activities of mathematics have better achievement than those having low learning activities, and students having medium learning activities have the same achievement with those having low learning activities in the trigonometry. (3) In the category of learning activities, students having high, medium and low, learning model TSTS, LC5E and direct learning model, have the same achievement in trigonometry. (4) In the learning model  TSTS and LC5E, students having high, medium and low learning activities have the same achievement trigonometry. For direct learning model, students having high learning activities have the same achievement with those having low learning actvities, students having high learning activities have better achievement than those having low learning activities, and students having medium learning activities have the same achievement with those having low learning activities.Keywords: TSTS, LC5E, Students Learning Activities and Learning Achievement  
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE NUMBERED HEAD TOGETHER (NHT) DAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS BELAJAR SISWA KELAS VII SMP NEGERI DI KABUPATEN PACITAN Daeka, Dalud; Budiyono, Budiyono; Sujadi, Imam
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 3 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The objectives of research were to find out: (1) which one providing better mathematics learning achievement, NHT or TPS or conventional learning model, (2) in the student creativity level, which one having better mathematics learning achievement, high or medium or low creativity, (3a) in each learning model (NHT, TPS and Conventional) which one providing better mathematics learning achievement, high or medium or low student learning creativity, (3b) in each student creativity level (high, medium, and low) which one providing better mathematics learning achievement, NHT or TPS or conventional learning model.This study was a quasi-experimental research. The research design used was a 3x3 factorial design. The population of research was all VII graders of Junior High Schools throughout Pacitan Regency in the school year of 2012/2013. Meanwhile the sample was taken using stratified random sampling. The sample consisted of 275 students: 92 students for experiment I class, 92 for experiment II class and 91 for control class. The instruments used to collect the data were learning creativity questionnaire and mathematics learning achievement test. From the result of research, it could be concluded that: (1) NHT learning model provided mathematics learning achievement as good as the TPS learning model did and better than the conventional learning model did, while TPS learning model provided mathematics learning achievement as good as the conventional learning model did. (2) The learning achievement of the students with high creativity was better than that of those with medium creativity, the learning achievement of the students with high creativity was better than that of those with low creativity, and the learning achievement of the students with medium creativity was as good as that of those with low creativity. (3a) On each learning model, the learning achievement of the students with high creativity was better than that of those with medium and low creativity, while the learning achievement of the students with medium creativity was as good as that of those with low creativity. (3b) On each creativity level whether high, medium or low, the mathematics learning achievement of the students taught with NHT learning model was as good as that of those taught with TPS learning model but was better than that of those taught with conventional model. And the learning achievement of the students taught with TPS learning model was as good as that of those taught with conventional model.Keywords: NHT, TPS, Conventional, Learning Creativity.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING, THINK ALOUD PAIR PROBLEM SOLVING DAN STUDENT TEAM ACHIEVEMENT DIVISION DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN LOGIS MATEMATIS Dwiningsih, Pitra; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Slamet, Isnandar
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 6 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The objective of research was to find out the effect of learning model, (high, medium and low) logical mathematic intelligence, and interaction between learning model and logical mathematic intelligence on mathematic learning achievement. The learning models compared were CPS with scientific approach, Tapps with scientific approach, and STAD with scientific approach. This research was quasi-experimental research with a 3 x 3 factorial design. The population of research was all of the 7th graders of Junior High Schools in Karanganyar Regency in academic year of 2014/2015. Technique of analyzing data used in this research was a two-way variance analysis with different cell. Considering the hypothesis testing, the following conclusions could be drawn. (1) The students subjected with the CPS learning model with scientific approach had a better learning achievement than students subjected by Tapps with scientific approach and STAD model with scientific approach, students subjected with the Tapps with scientific approach had better learning achievement than students subjected by STAD model with scientific approach; (2) In students with high logical mathematical intelligence gave the same learning the students with medium logical mathematical intelligence, students who had high and medium logical mathematical intelligence had a better learning achievement than students who had low logical mathematical intelligence; (3) The STAD and CPS learning models, students with high logical mathematical intelligence had a better learning achievement than students with medium and low logical mathematical intelligence, students with medium logical mathematical intelligence had the same learning achievement of students with low logical mathematical intelligence. The Tapps learning model, students with high and medium logical mathematical intelligence to had the same learning achievement, students with high and medium logical mathematical intelligence had a better learning achievement than students with low mathematical logical intelligence; (4) The students with high, medium and low logical mathematical intelligence subjected to CPS, Tapps and STAD learning models had the same learning achievement, but on the students with lower intelligence logical mathematical learning had subjected to model CPS had a better learning achievement than students who had subjected to STAD model.Keywords: Creative Problem Solving (CPS), Think Aloud Pair Problem Solving (Tapps), Division Achievement Student Team (STAD), Scientific Approach and Logical Mathematic Intelligence.
PENGARUH PROBLEM BASED LEARNING TERHADAP HASIL BELAJAR SISWA PADA MATERI TRIGONOMETRI Muhammad Kaluwih Pangertian Junaidi; Moch. Lutfianto
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 5, No 2 (2018): Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (434.531 KB)

Abstract

Abstract :The study discusses the effect of applying problem-based learning model (PBL) on students’ learning outcomes at class X TAV I of State Vocational School (SMKN) 3 Surabaya. The objectives of this study are to find out: (1) mathematics learning outcomes at class X TAV I of State Vocational School (SMKN) 3 Surabaya before the application of PBL model 2) learning outcomes of students taught with PBL model, and 3) the effect of applying PBL model on learning outcomes at class X TAV I of State Vocational School (SMKN) 3 Surabaya. This study uses pre-experimental design in the form of one group pretest-posttest design. The population in this study are all students at class X TAV I of State Vocational School (SMKN) 3 Surabaya, consisting of 33 students. The sampling technique is a saturated sample technique. The instruments in this study are Pre-test and Post-test results. Data analysis technique uses descriptive statistics. The results show that the average value of the participants before being taught with PBL model is 51.94 and the average value after being taught with PBL model up to 52.88. The result of descriptive statistical analysis is r count 0.753771922 > r table 0.632. Meanwhile, the results of statistical calculation analysis is 0.05 (0.632 <0.753771922) with credibility level up to 95%. It means that there is an effect of PBL model on students’ learning outcomes because H0is rejected and Ha is accepted.Keywords:Problem based learning (PBL) model, Mathematics Learning Outcomes.

Page 32 of 35 | Total Record : 347

 30   31   32   33   34 

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