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
 4   5   6   7   8 
ANALISIS PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA PADA SEKOLAH YANG MENERAPKAN PENDEKATAN PMRI DAN SEKOLAH YANG TIDAK MENERAPKAN PENDEKATAN PMRI DI KOTA YOGYAKARTA Hasan S Negara; Imam Sujadi; Pangadi Pangadi
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 aims of this study were describing the process of mathematics learning and its problem solving for primary III students whom school was applying PMRI approach and non applying PMRI approach. This research was a qualitative case study type. The subject of this study divided into 2, which were: subject for searching information about learning process and subject for searching information about problem solving. Subject in this study were 2 primary teachers, 1 teacher from SD Kanisius Demangan Baru and 1 teacher from SD Muhammadiyah Demangan, another subject were 4 students, 2 students from SD Kanisius Demangan Baru and 2 students from SD Muhammadiyah Demangan. The data was divided into 2, which were learning process data that contain about teacher and student activities in learning and mathematical problem solving data that contain about information problem solving in mathematics. Learning process data was collected from recording transcription result of learning activities toward two observations, while mathematical problem solving data was collected by using the think aloud method. The result revealed that mathematical problem solving abilities in students with high ability type in school PMRI approach better than students in schools that do not implement PMRI approach, but problem solving abilities in students with low ability types in school PMRI approach is not better than students in schools that do not applying the PMRI approach.Key words: Learning process, problem solving, PMRI approac
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN TEAMS ASSITED INDIVIDUALIZATION (TAI) DAN NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER (NHT) DENGAN PENDEKATAN KONTEKSTUAL PADA MATERI SISTEM PERSAMAAN LINEAR DUA VARIABEL DITINJAUDARI KREATIVITAS BELAJAR SISWA Kurnia Awalia; Budiyono Budiyono; Imam Sujadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 4 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of the research was to determine the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement viewed from students learning creativity. The learning models compared were TAI with contextual approach, NHT with contextual approach, and direct instruction  with contextual approach. The type of the research was a quasi-experimental research. The populations were all students of Junior High School in Gemolong subdistrict. Sampling was done by stratified cluster random sampling. The samples were students of SMPN 1 Gemolong, SMPN 2 Gemolong, and SMP Muh 9 Gemolong. The instruments used were mathematics achievement tests and creativity questionnaire. The data was analyzed using unbalanced two-ways anova. The conclusions were as follows. (1) TAI with contextual approach gives better mathematics achievement than NHT with contextual approach, TAI with contextual approach gives better mathematics achievement than direct instruction with contextual approach, NHT and direct instruction with contextual approach have the same mathematics achievement. (2) For students with high and medium learning creativity have the same mathematics achievement. Mathematics achievement of students who have high and medium learning creativity was better than students who have low learning creativity. (3) For students who have high learning creativity, all learning models gives the same mathematics achievement. (4) For students who have medium learning creativity, all learning models gives the same mathematics achievement. (5) For students who have low learning creativity, TAI and NHT with contextual approach gives the same mathematics achievement. NHT and direct instruction with contextual approach gives the same mathematics achievement. TAI with contextual approach gives better mathematics achievement than direct instruction with contextual approach.Keywords: TAI, NHT, contextual approach, learning achievement, learning creativity.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE THINK-PAIR-SHARE (TPS) DAN LEARNING CYCLE 5E (LC 5E) DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK DITINJAU DARI TIPE KEPRIBADIAN SISWA Rina Mahmudati; Budiyono Budiyono; Sri Subanti
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 objective of this research was to investigate the effect of the learning models on learning achievement viewed from the personality type of the students. The learning models compared were the cooperative learning model of the TPS, LC 5E, and the classical learning model with scientific approach. The type of the research was a quasi-experimental research. The instruments used were mathematics achievement test on the topic of function and questionnaire of personality type. The data was analyzed by using two way analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The conclusions of the research were as follows. (1) The mathematic learning achievement of students treated with TPS learning model was as good as that of those treated with LC 5E model, and that of those treated with TPS learning model was as good as that of those treated with classical learning model with scientific approach, and that of those treated with LC 5E model was better than that of those treated with classical learning model with scientific approach; (2) The mathematic learning achievement of students with sanguine personality was better than that of those with melancholic one but was as good as that of those with choleric and phlegmatic personalities, that of those with choleric personality was better than that of those with melancholic one, and that of those with melancholic personality was as good as that of those with phlegmatic, and that of those with choleric personality was as good as that of those with phlegmatic one; (3) In each type of student personality, it could be found that the students treated with Think-Pair-Share had equally good learning achievement to those treated with LC 5E model, the students treated with TPS had equally good learning achievement to those treated with classical learning model with scientific approach, those treated with LC 5E model had better learning achievement than those treated with classical learning model with scientific approach; and (4) In each type of learning models, it could be found that the learning achievement of students with sanguine personality was better than that of those with melancholic one but was as good as that of those with choleric and phlegmatic personalities, that of those with choleric personality was better than that of those with melancholic one, and that of those with melancholic personality was as good as that of those with phlegmatic, and that of those with choleric personality was as good as that of those with phlegmatic one.Keywords: Learning Cycle 5E, Think-Pair-Share, Classical with scientific approach, personality type 
TINGKAT KREATIVITAS SISWA DALAM MEMECAHKAN MASALAH MATEMATIKA DIVERGEN DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA (Studi Pada Siswa Kelas IX MTS Negeri Plupuh Kabupaten Sragen Semester Gasal Tahun Pelajaran 2013/ 2014) Rino Richardo; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Dewi Retno Sari
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 aims of this research is to describe the level of Junior High School students’ creativity in solving divergent mathematical problem viewed from the students’ learning style.This study was qualitative descriptive reasearch. The subject of this research was 9 students from the ninth grade of MTSN Plupuh consisting of 4 students had visual learning style, 3 students had auditorial learning style, and 2 students had kinesthetic learning style. The researcher used purposive sampling and snowball method to select the subject. In collecting data, the researcher used grouping test in learning style, problem solving test of divergent mathematics, and interview. To techniques of data analysis in this research were as follows: (1) reducing data, (2) present of data in narrative text, (3) To conclude the level of students’ creativity at each learning style. The validity of data used time triangulation.Based on the research result, there are two findings as follows: main findings and other findings. The main findings shows that (1) the students with visual and auditorial learning styles can eligible to indicators of creativity, fluently and flexibility, so that those students have the third level of creativity (creative) in solving divergent mathematical problem, (2) While, the students with kinesthetic learning style can eligible to indicators of creativity, namely fluently. So that those students have the first level of creativity (less creative) in solving divergent mathematical problem. Then, the other findings data shows that (1) there are two students with visual learning style are identified having the second level (quite creative) and the forth level (very creative) of creativity in solving divergent mathematical problem, (2) while there is one student with auditorial learning style is identified not creative (level 0). Based on the findings, it can be concluded that the students’ learning styles affect to students’ creativity, so that the teacher should know and understand students’ learning style in order to determine the best method of learning process. It is because each learning style affects to students’ different responses in getting the information.Keywords : Level of Creativity, Problem Solving, Divergent Mathematics, Students’ Learning Style
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE TEAMS GAMES TOURNAMENT (TGT) DAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) PADA MATERI ALJABAR DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN LOGIS MATEMATIS SISWA KELAS VII SMP NEGERI SE-KOTA SURAKARTA TAHUN PELAJARAN 2015/2016 Retna Ayuningrum; Budiyono Budiyono; Isnandar Slamet
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 objectives of this research were to find out: (1) which one learning model that provide better mathematics learning achievement, TGT learning model, TPS learning model, or direct learning model, (2) which one category logical matematical intelligence of students that giving better mathematics learning achievement, high, medium, or low, (3) in each category logical matematical intelligence which one providing better mathematics learning achievement, TGT learning model TPS learning model, or direct learning  model. (4) in each learning models which one providing better mathematics learning achievement category self confidence high, medium, or low. The type of this study was a quasi-experimental study with a 3x3 factorial design. The population was all grade VII students of Junior High Schools in Surakarta Regency in the school year of 2015/2016. Population of this research was all VII graders of Junior High School of Surakarta. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling. The sample consisted of 291 students: 96 students for experiment I class, 97 for experiment II class and 98 for control class. The instruments used for the data collection were mathematics achievement test and logical mathematical intelligence The data analysis technique used was unbalanced two ways analysis of variance. Based on the hypotheses, the results of the study can be summarized as follows: (1) The use of TGT resulted better achievement than that of TPS and direct learning model, the use of TPS resulted better achievement than that of direct learning model. (2) The students’ achievement who have high logical mathematical intelligence was better than those who have middle or low logical mathematical intelligence, and students who have middle logical mathematical intelligence were better than those who have low logical mathematic intelligence.Keywords: TGT,TPS, Direct Learning, and Logical Mathematical Intelligence.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE THINK PAIR SHARE DENGAN PENDEKATAN ILMIAH PADA POKOK BAHASAN LIMIT FUNGSI DITINJAU DARI ADVERSITY QUOTIENT PESERTA DIDIK SMA NEGERI KABUPATEN BANYUMAS TAHUN PELAJARAN 2013/2014 Dian Ratna Ariyani; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Dewi Retno Sari S
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 5 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract : The purposes of the  research  were  to  know:  (1)  which  learning  models  -think pair share cooperative learning model with scientific approach (TPS SA), think pair share cooperative learning (TPS), and direct learning model (DL)-that will give the best learning mathematics result;  (2)  which level of students adversity  quotient  (AQ) -quitter, camper, and climber-that will give the best mathematics learning result; (3) which learning models -TPS SA, TPS, and DL- that will give the best learning mathematics result at categories AQ; (4) which level of students AQ -quitter, camper and climber- that will give the best learning mathematics result at categories learning models. The research used a quasi-experimental designed with population was all students of eleventh grade science in Banyumas in the academic year 2013/2014. The technique sampling was stratified cluster random sampling. The instrument used to collect the data was a questionnaire of AQ and math achievement tests. Hypothesis test used two way analysis of variance with unequal cells. Based on the analysis we concluded: (1) TPS SA provided a better learning achievement than only TPS and direct learning, TPS provided a better learning achievement than direct learning; (2) climber students had a better learning achievement than camper and quitter, camper had a better learning achievement than a quitter; (3) for climber students, TPS SA, TPS, and  direct learning provided the same good learning performance, for camper students, TPS SA provided a better learning achievement than TPS and direct learning, TPS provided a better learning achievement than direct learning, for quitter students, TPS SA, TPS, and  direct learning provided the same good learning performance; (4) in TPS SA, climber students had an academic achievement as good as camper students, climber students had a better learning achievement than quitter students, camper students had a better learning achievement than quitter students, in TPS, climber students had a better learning achievement than quitter and camper, camper students had a better learning achievement than quitter, in direct learning, climber students had a better learning achievement than quitter and camper, camper students had academic achievement as good as quitter.Keywords: Cooperative  Learning,  Scientific  Approach,  Think  Pair  Share  with scientific approach, Adversity Quotient (AQ).
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TEAM ASSISTED INDIVIDUALIZATION (TAI) DAN TEAMS GAMES TOURNAMENTS (TGT) DITINJAU DARI TINGKAT KECERDASAN EMOSIONAL TERHADAP PRESTASI BELAJAR DAN HUBUNGAN INTERPERSONAL SISWA KELAS VIII SMP NEGERI KABUPATEN SLEM Fina Hanifa Hidayati; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Tri Atmojo Kusmayadi
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 purposes of this study were to determine the effect of instructional models on student’s mathematics achievement learning and interpersonal relationship  viewed from the student emotional intelligence. The learning model compared were direct learning model, TAI and TGT Cooperative Learning Model. This study was a quasi-experimental study. The samples were 263 students: 88 students for experiment, 85 students for experiment 2, and 90 students for the controlled class,. The data were collected from mathematics achievement tests, a set of questionnaire of interpersonal relationship and emotional intelligence. The data were analysed using unbalanced two way MANOVA. Based on the research findings, it can concluded as follows. (1) Both learning achievement and interpersonal relationships of students treated by TGT are better than students treated with TAI and direct learning model while learning achievement and interpersonal relationships of students treated by TAI are better than students treated by direct learning model; (2) a. The best learning achievement is reached by students with high emotional intelligence which followed by those with moderate level and low emotional intelligence; b. The interpersonal relationships of students with moderate emotional intelligence are the same as those with low level, and students with high level are better than students with medium and low level emotional intelligence; (3) In TAI and direct models, learning achievement of the students of any level of emotional intelligence are the same. In TGT model, learning achievement of students with high level of emotional intelligence are the same as those with moderate level, also moderate and low level of emotional intelligence have same learning achievement, and high level emotional intelligence better than students with low level of emotional intelligence in learning achievement; In direct learning and TAI models the best interpersonal relationships is reached by students with high emotional intelligence which followed by those with medium level and low emotional intelligence. In TGT model, interpersonal relationships of students with high level of emotional intelligence are the same as those with moderate level, and both of them are better than students with low level of emotional intelligence; In the moderate level of emotional intelligence, learning achievement of students treated by TAI and direct learning model are the same while learning achievement of students treated by TGT model are better than those treated by direct model, and learning achievement of students treated by TGT and TAI are the same. In the low level of emotional intelligence, achievement of students treated by TAI, TGT, and direct learning are the same; At any level of emotional intelligence, interpersonal relationships of students treated by TGT are better than those treated by TAI and direct learning, and interpersonal relationships of students treated by TAI are better than those treated by direct instructional model.Keywords: TAI, TGT, Emotional Intelligence, Learning Achievement, Interpersonal Relationships.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE JIGSAW DAN TEAMS GAMES TOURNAMENT (TGT) PADA MATERI KUBUS DAN BALOK DITINJAU DARI KEMAMPUAN PENALARAN MATEMATIKA PESERTA DIDIK SMP NEGERI KELAS VIII SE-KOTA METRO Ummi Rosyidah; Tri Atmojo Kusmayadi; Riyadi Riyadi
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 objectives of the research were to find out: (1) which one providing better mathematics learning achievement the cooperative learning model of the jigsaw type, TGT or direct learning model, (2) in the student mathematical reasoning abilities, which one having better mathematics learning achievement, the students with the high, moderate or low mathematical reasoning abilities, (3) in each learning models (jigsaw, TGT or direct learning model) which one providing better mathematics learning achievement, the students with the high, moderate or low mathematical reasoning abilities, (4) in each student mathematical reasoning abilities (high, moderate, or low) which one providing better mathematics learning achievement, the cooperative learning model of the jigsaw type, TGT, and the direct learning model. This research used the quasi experimental research. Its population was all of the students in Grade VIII of State Junior Secondary Schools in Metro City. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique and consisted of 243 students. The instruments to collect the data were test of Mathematics learning achievement and test of achievement in mathematical reasoning abilities. Technique of analyzing data that used was unbalanced two way analysis of variance. The results of the research were as follows. 1) The cooperative learning model of the jigsaw type results better Mathematics learning achievement than the cooperative learning model of the TGT type and the direct learning model, the cooperative learning model of the TGT type results better learning achievement in Mathematics than the direct learning model. 2) The students with the high mathematical reasoning abilities have better learning achievement in Mathematics than those with the moderate mathematical reasoning abilities and those with the low mathematical reasoning abilities, the students with the moderate mathematical reasoning abilities have better learning achievement in Mathematics than those with the low mathematical reasoning abilities. 3) In the cooperative learning model of the jigsaw type and TGT, the students with the high mathematical reasoning abilities have same achievement in Mathematics as those with the moderate mathematical reasoning abilities and those with the low mathematical reasoning abilities. In the direct learning model, the students with the high mathematical reasoning abilities have  better learning achievement in Mathematics than those with the low mathematical reasoning abilities. 4) In each of the mathematical reasoning abilities of students which are high and moderate, the cooperative learning model of the jigsaw type results same learning achievement in Mathematics as the cooperative learning model of the TGT type and the direct learning model. In addition, in the low mathematical reasoning abilities, the cooperative learning model of the jigsaw type results better learning achievement in Mathematics than the direct learning model.Keywords: Jigsaw, TGT, Direct Learning, and Mathematical Reasoning Abilities
EKSPERIMENTASI PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA MENGGUNAKAN PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE TEAM ASSISTED INDIVIDUALIZATION DAN TIPE GROUP INVESTIGATION PADA MATERI PERSAMAAN DAN PERTIDAKSAMAAN KUADRAT DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR KOLB PADA SISWA SMA NEGERI KELAS X Triana Harmini; Imam Sujadi; Dewi Retno Sari S
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:The objectives of this research were to determine: (1) which students had the better mathematics learning achievement, instructed with TAI, GI, or direct instruction;  (2) which students had the better mathematics learning achievement, those with the converger, diverger, assimilator, or accommodator learning style; (3) in each learning style, which  students had better mathematics learning achievement, instructed with TAI, GI, or direct instruction; (4) in each learning model, which students had a better mathematics learning achievement, those with the converger, diverger, assimilator, or accommodator learning style. This study was  aquasi-experimental study with 3 x 4 factorial designs. Data analysis used unbalanced two-way ANAVA with a significance level of 5%. The study population was a tenth grade student of State SMA in Ponorogo in academic year of 2013/2014. Sampling was done by stratified cluster random sampling technique. The study sample consisted of students in 3 schools namely SMA Negeri 3 Ponorogo, SMA Negeri 1 Kauman, and SMA Negeri 1 Balong with a sample size of 275 students.. The results of the research are as follows. (1) The students instructed with TAI had learning achievement as good as GI, those with TAI had learning achievement better than those with direct instruction, while those GI had learning achievement as good as those with direct instruction. (2)The students with the converger learning style had learning achievement as good as those with the diverger learning style, the students with the converger learning style had learning achievement better than those with the assimilator and accommodator learning style, the students with the diverger, assimilator, and   accommodator learning style had a same learning achievement. (3) In each learning style, the students mathematics learning achievement was in consistency with the result (1); (4) In each learning model, the students mathematics learning achievement was in consistency with the result (2). Keywords: TAI, GI, Direct Instruction, learning styles, and learning achievement
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN PROBLEM BASED INSTRUCTION, INKUIRI TERBIMBING DAN KONVENSIONAL PADA MATERI POKOK BANGUN RUANG SISI DATAR DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS SISWA SMP NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN BLORA Yudhi Hanggara
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 1 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

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

Abstract

Abstract: This research aims to find out: (1) which learning model providing better learning achievement, PBI, Guided Inquiry or Conventional learning, (2) which students having better learning achievement, those with high, medium or low creativity, and (3) in each creativity level, which one providing better learning achievement, PBI, Guided Inquiry or Conventional learning model. In each learning model which students having better learning achievement, those with high, medium or low creativity. The population of research was all students of Junior High Schools throughout Blora Regency. The sample was taken using stratified cluster random sampling. The sample of research consisted of 272 students: 92 in the first experiment class, 91 in the second experiment class, and 89 in the third experiment class. The result of research showed that: (1) PBI model provided better learning achievement than the guided inquiry model did, but provided learning achievement equally good to the Conventional learning model did and Conventional learning model provided better learning achievement than the guided inquiry model did; (2) the students with high creativity had learning achievement better than those with both medium and low creativity had, and the students with medium creativity had learning achievement equally good to those with low creativity had. (3) In PBI and guided inquiry learning models, the students with high creativity had learning achievement better than those with low creativity had, the students with high creativity had learning achievement equally good to those with medium creativity had, and the students with medium creativity had learning achievement equally good to those with low creativity had. In conventional learning, the students with high creativity had learning achievement equally good to those with both medium and low creativity. At high and medium creativity level, PBI, Guided Inquiry and Conventional Model provided the equally good learning achievement. Meanwhile, at low creativity level, PBI learning model provided learning achievement equally good to the conventional learning model did, and Conventional learning model provided learning achievement better than the Guided Inquiry learning model did.Keywords: PBI, Guided Inquiry, Conventional, Creativity

Page 6 of 35 | Total Record : 347

 4   5   6   7   8 

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