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 S2 Pendidikan Matematika
Published by Universitas Sebelas Maret
ISSN : -     EISSN : -     DOI : -
Core Subject : Education,
Education Mathematics
Arjuna Subject : -
Articles 10 Documents
 1 
Search results for , issue " Vol 4, No 8 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika" : 10 Documents clear
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN TEAM ASSISTED INDIVIDUALIZATION (TAI) DAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK PADA MATERI FUNGSI DITINJAU DARI INTERAKSI SOSIAL Cahyono, Heri; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Sari Saputro, Dewi Retno
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 8 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Program Studi Magister Pendidikan Matematika Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan UNS

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (317.072 KB)

Abstract

Abstract. The aim of the research was to determine the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement viewed from student’s social interaction. The learning models compared were TAI with scientific approach, TPS with scientific approach, and classical with scientific approach. The type of the research was a quasi experimental research with the factorial design of 3 x 3. The population were all eight grade students of Junior High School in Ngawi regency on academic year 2014/2015. The sample consisted of students of SMPN 3 Ngrambe, SMPN 2 Paron, and SMPN 2 Widodaren, which taken by using stratified cluster random sampling technique. The data of the research were collected through documentation, questionnaire, and test. The data was analyzed using unbalanced two-ways anova at the significance level of 0,05. Based on the data analysis, it can be concluded as follows. (1) TAI with scientific approach gives better mathematics achievement than TPS with scientific approach and classical with scientific approach, TPS with scientific approach and classical with scientific approach gives same mathematics achievement. (2) Students with high social interaction have better mathematics achievements than students with medium social interaction and low social interaction, while students with medium social interaction have better mathematics achievements than students with low social interaction. (3) For TAI with scientific approach, students with high and medium social interaction have the same mathematics achievements, and both have better mathematics achievement than low social interaction. For TPS with scientific approach, students with high social interaction have better mathematics achievement than students with medium and low social interaction, and students with medium and low social interaction have the same mathematics achievement. For classical with scientific approach, students with high social interaction have better mathematics achievement than students with medium social interaction, and both have the same mathematics achievement as students with low social interaction. (4) For students with high and low social interaction, all learning models gives the same mathematics achievement. For students with medium social interaction, TAI with scientific approach gives better mathematics achievement than TPS with scientific approach and classical with scientific approach, TPS with scientific approach and classical with scientific approach gives the same mathematics achievement.Keywords: TAI with scientific approach, TPS with scientific approach, classical learning, social interaction, learning achievement.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN TWO STAY TWO STRAY (TSTS) DAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK PADA MATERI HIMPUNAN DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN LOGIS-MATEMATIS Andhika, Niken Dwi; Usodo, Budi; Subanti, Sri
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 8 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Program Studi Magister Pendidikan Matematika Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan UNS

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (252.021 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of the research was to determine the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement viewed from student’s logical-mathematical intelligence. The learning model compared were classical with scientific approach, TSTS with scientific approach, and TPS with scientific approach. This was quasi-experimental research with 3x3 factorial design. The population were all students of Junior High School in Pati. The samples are the students of SMPN 3 Pati, SMPN 8 Pati, and SMPN 2 Margorejo, which taken by using stratified cluster random sampling technique. The instruments used were mathematics achievement test and matematical-logical intelligence test. The data analysis technique was used unbalanced two ways anova. Based on the data analysis, it can be concluded as follows. (1) TSTS with scientific approach gives better mathematics achievement than TPS with scientific approach, and both gives better mathematics achievement than classical with scientific approach. (2) Mathematics achievement of students who have high logical-mathematical intelligence was better than students who have medium logical-mathematical intelligence, and both gives better mathematics achievement than students who have low logical-mathematical intelligence. (3) For classical with scientific approach, mathematics achievement of students who have high logical-mathematical intelligence was better than students who have medium logical-mathematical intelligence, and both gives better mathematics achievement than students who have low logical-mathematical intelligence. For TSTS with scientific approach and TPS with scientific approach, students who have high and medium logical-mathematical intelligence have the same mathematics achievement, and both have the better mathematics achievement than low logical-mathematical intelligence. (4) For students who have high and low logical-mathematical intelligence, all learning models gives the same mathematics achievement. For students who have medium logical-mathematical intelligence, TSTS with scientific approach gives the better mathematics achievement than classical with scientific approach. TSTS with scientific approach and TPS with scientific approach gives same mathematics achievement. TPS with scientific approach and classical with scientific approach gives the same mathematics achievement.Keywords: Classical, Two Stay Two Stray (TSTS), Think Pair Share (TPS), Scientific Approach, logical-mathematical intelligence
REPRESENTASI MATEMATIS SISWA DALAM MENYELESAIKAN MASALAH MATEMATIKA PADA MATERI ARITMATIKA SOSIAL DAN PERBANDINGAN DITINJAU DARI GAYA KOGNITIF SISWA KELAS VII SMP NEGERI 15 SURAKARTA TAHUN AJARAN 2014/2015 Tyas, Wahyu Handining; Sujadi, Imam; Riyadi, Riyadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 8 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Program Studi Magister Pendidikan Matematika Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan UNS

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (268.025 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: This research intended to describe the mathematical representation of 7th grade students in SMPN 15 Surakarta in solving mathematical problem based on Krulik-Rudnick steps on the topic of social arithmetic and comparison viewed from cognitive style of Field Independent and Field Dependent. The procedure used to select the subject was snowball sampling, with six subjects consisted of three subjects in each cognitive style being analyzed. The data validation was carried out using time triangulation. The representation used by Field Independent (FI) students in solving mathematical problem based on Krulik-Rudnick steps was as follows: 1) In the first two steps, Read and Think and Explore and Plan, students used verbal representation; 2) In the next step, Select a Strategy and Find an Answer, students used symbolic representation; 3) In the last step, Reflect and Extend, students used visual and symbolic representation. The representation used by Field Dependent (FD) students in solving mathematical problems based on Krulik- Rudnick steps was as follows: 1) In the first two steps, Read and Think and Explore and Plan, students presented the given information and asked questions by using verbal and visual representation gradually, clearly and correctly; 2) In the next step, Select a Strategy and Find an Answer, students used symbolic representation by assuming the given information and asked questions into “x” and “y” and wrote it in incorrect algebraic equation, wrote simple interest rate and proportion formula, as well as used symbolic representation by substituting one equation to another incompletely, yet had a correct final result; 3) In the last step, Reflect and Extend, students used verbal and visual representation.Keywords: mathematical representation, problem solving, cognitive styles
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE COOPERATIVE INTEGRATED READING AND COMPOSITION (CIRC) DAN PROBLEM POSING BENTUK WITHIN-SOLUTION POSING PADA MATERI PERBANDINGAN DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN INTERPERSONAL SISWA SMP NEGERI KOTA PONTIANAK Susiaty, Utin Desy; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Sari Saputro, Dewi Retno
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 8 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Program Studi Magister Pendidikan Matematika Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan UNS

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (279.066 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The aims of this study were to investigate: (1) which learning model produces student’s better mathematics learning achievement, Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition (CIRC), Problem Posing Learning Model Within-Solution Posing (WSP) Form or classical learning model; (2) which student’s have better mathematics learning achievement, those with high, medium, or low interpersonal intelligence; (3) viewed from learning models, which student’s have better mathematics learning achievement, those with high, medium, or low interpersonal intelligence; (4) viewed from interpersonal intelligences, which learning model produces better mathematics learning achievement, CIRC, WSP or classical learning model. This research used quasi experimental method with its population included all of students of state junior high school in Pontianak City. Sampling was done by stratified cluster random sampling technique. The size of the sample was 313 students. The data collection technique was include the documentation method to get the 2013/2014 National Test (UN) of Elementary School for initial capability data before the experiment, achievement test for mathematics student’s achievement data, and questioner of interpersonal intelligence. The data was analyzed using analysis of variance. Based on these results it can be concluded as follows. (1) Mathematics learning using CIRC produced the same mathematics achievement as using classical learning model. However, mathematics learning using WSP produced student’s better mathematics learning achievement than using CIRC and classical learning model. (2) For students with high, medium, or low interpersonal intelligence have the same mathematics achievement. (3) Viewed from learning models, students with high, medium, or low interpersonal intelligence have the same mathematics achievement. (4) Viewed from interpersonal intelligences, mathematics learning using WSP produced student’s better mathematics learning achievement than using CIRC and classical learning model. However, mathematics learning using CIRC and classical learning model have the same mathematics achievement.Keywords: CIRC learning model, WSP learning model, interpersonal intelligence, the mathematical achievement
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE TEAM ASSISTED INDIVIDUALIZATION (TAI) DAN THREE STEPS INTERVIEW (TSI) PADA MATERI FUNGSI DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN LOGIS MATEMATIS Purnamasari, Anita; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Subanti, Sri
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 8 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Program Studi Magister Pendidikan Matematika Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan UNS

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (424.339 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of the learning models TAI, PC, and direct learning model on mathematics learning achievement viewed from the students adversity quotient. The type of this study was quasi experimental study with 3x3 factorial design. The population were the eighth-grade students of junior high schools in Sukoharjo Regency in the academic year of 2015/2016. Instruments used for data collection were mathematics achievement test and adversity quotient questionnaire. The data analysis technique used was the two-way ANAVA with unbalanced cell. Based on the hipothesis test, it was concluded as follows. 1) The mathematics learning achie vement of TAI was better than PC and direct learning model, the mathematics learning achievement of PC was better than direct learning model. 2) The mathematics learning achievement of students with climbers category were better than campers and quitters category. Students with campers category were better than quitters category. 3) Students with climbers category who were treated by TAI, PC, and direct learning models had same mathematics learning achievement; students with campers category who were treated by TAI was same of PC and was better than direct learning model, PC was better than direct learning model; students with quitters category who were treated by TAI had same mathematics learning achievement with PC and direct learning model, PC was better than direct learning model. 4) In TAI learning model, the mathematics learning achievement of climbers category were better than campers and quitters category, the mathematics learning achievement of campers category was better than quitters category; in PC learning model, students with climbers category has equal of campers and was better than quitters category, the mathematics learning achievement of campers category were better than quitters category; in direct learning model, students with climbers category has better mathematics learning achievement than campers and quitters category, students with campers category has equal of quitters category.Keywords: Team Assisted Individualization, Pairs Check, Direct Learning Model, Adversity Quotient, Achievement.
KOOPERATIF TIPE TAI (TEAM ASSISTED INDIVIDUALIZATION) DAN NHT (NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER) DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN MAJEMUK SISWA PADA POKOK BAHASAN FUNGSI KELAS VIII SMP NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN NGAWI TAHUN PELAJARAN 2014/2015 Astuti, Indra Puji; Budiyono, Budiyono; Subanti, Sri
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 8 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Program Studi Magister Pendidikan Matematika Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan UNS

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (285.588 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of this research was to determine the effect of learning model, multiple intelligences (logical-mathematical, linguistic, and interpersonal), and their interaction toward mathematics learning achievement. The learning models compared were the cooperative learning of Teams Assisted Individualization with scientific approach (TAI-PS), Numbered Heads Together with scientific approach (NHT-PS), and classical learning with scientific approach (classical-PS). This research was a quasi-experimental research with 3x3 factorial design. The population of this research was all students in Grade VIII of Junior High School of Ngawi Regency in academic year 2014/2015. This research used stratified cluster random sampling technique. The data analysis techniques of this research used two-way analysis of variance with unequal cells. With the 5% level of significance the result were as follows. (1) TAI-PS gave better mathematics learning achievement than NHT-PS and classical-PS. In addition, NHT-PS gave the same mathematics learning achievement as classical-PS. (2) Students with logical-mathematical and interpersonal intelligence had better mathematics learning achievement than students with linguistic intelligence. Students with logical-mathematical intelligence had the same mathematics learning achievement as students with interpersonal intelligence. (3) At the TAI-PS, students with logical-mathematical, linguistic, and interpersonal intelligence got same mathematics learning achievement. At the NHT-PS, students with logical-mathematical, linguistic, and interpersonal intelligence got same mathematics learning achievement. At the classical-PS, students with logical-mathematical and interpersonal intelligence had better mathematics learning achievement than linguistic intelligence. In addition, students with logical-mathematical intelligence had the same mathematics learning achievement as students with interpersonal intelligence. (4) At the logical-mathematical intelligence, TAI-PS, NHT-PS, and classical-PS gave the same mathematics learning achievement. At the linguistic intelligence, TAI-PS gave the same mathematics learning achievement as NHT-PS. In addition, NHT-PS and TAI-PS gave better mathematics learning achievement than classical-PS. At the interpersonal intelligence, TAI-PS, NHT-PS, and classical-PS gave the same mathematics learning achievement.Keywords: Multiple Intelligences, Classical, NHT (Numbered Heads Together), Scientific Approach, TAI (Team Assisted Individualization)
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DAN TWO STAY-TWO STRAY (TS-TS) PADA POKOK BAHASAN PERSAMAAN DAN PERTIDAKSAMAAN KUADRAT DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR PADA SISWA SMA NEGERI KELAS X DI KABUPATEN PONOROGO Fuany, Anggun; Budiyono, Budiyono; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 8 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Program Studi Magister Pendidikan Matematika Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan UNS

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (293.047 KB)

Abstract

Abstract. The objectives of this research were to determine: (1) which students had the better mathematics learning achievement, instructed with TPS, TS-TS, or direct learning; (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 TPS, TS-TS, or direct learning; (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. The study population was a tenth grade student of State SMA in Ponorogo in academic year of 2015/2016. Sampling was done by stratified cluster random sampling technique. The study sample consisted of students in 3 schools namely SMA Negeri 1 Badegan, SMA Negeri 1 Kauman, and SMA Negeri 1 Bungkal with a sample size of 226 students. Data analysis used unbalanced two-way ANAVA with a significance level of 5%. The results of the research are as follows. (1) The students instructed with TPS had learning achievement as good as TS-TS, those with TPS had learning achievement better than those with direct learning, while those TS-TS had learning achievement as good as those with direct learning. (2)The students with the converger learning style had learning achievement better than those with the diverger and assimilator learning style, the students with the converger learning style had learning achievement as good as those with the 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: TPS, TS-TS, Direct Learning, learning styles, and learning  achievement
MENDAPAT PEMBELAJARAN BERBASIS MASALAH DENGAN SISWA YANG MENDAPAT PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE THINK PAIR SHARE DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA SMP NEGERI SE-KOTA METRO, LAMPUNG TAHUN PELAJARAN 2014/2015 Pratama, Yulian Surya; Budiyono, Budiyono; Slamet, Isnandar
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 8 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Program Studi Magister Pendidikan Matematika Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan UNS

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (305.734 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The purpose of this research was to know the effect of the learning models on the problem solving ability and mathematics communication ability viewed from the learning style. The learning models compared were Problem Based Learning, Think Pair Share learning and Classical. The type of this study was a quasi-experimental study with a 3 x 3 factorial design. The study population was all grade VIII students of Junior High School in Metro city. Sample was collected by stratified cluster random sampling and consisted of 245 students which where divided into three groups,  83 students in Experimental Group 1, 81 students in Experimental Group 2, and 81 students in Control Group . The instruments of the research include problem solving ability test, mathematics communication ability test and learning style test. The technique of analyzing data used the two-way multivariate analysis of variance with unbalanced cell. The results of this research could be concluded as follows. (1) Problem Based Learning and Think Pair Share have better problem solving and mathematics communication ability aspects than the Classical learning, Besides that, Think Pair Share and Classical Learning  have the same problem solving and mathematics communication ability; (2) The students who have visual learning style have better problem solving and mathematics communication ability than students who have kinesthetic learning style. In addition, students with auditory learning style have the same problem solving and mathematics communication ability as kinesthetic learning style (3) In each of the learning style, the learning model of Problem Based Learning give a better problem solving and mathematics communication ability than the Classical model, and the cooperative learning model of Think Pair Share and Classical Learning give the same problem solving and mathematics communication ability; (4) In each learning model, the students with visual and auditory learning style have better problem solving and mathematics communication ability than students who have kinesthetic learning style, and the students with visual and auditory learning style have the same problem solving and mathematics communication ability.Keywords: Problem Based Learning, Think Pair Share, Learning Style, Problem Solving Ability, Mathematics Communication Ability.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN THINK-TALK-WRITE DENGAN MIND MAPPING PADA MATERI PERSAMAAN GARIS LURUS DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS BELAJAR MATEMATIKA PESERTA DIDIK KELAS VIII SMP NEGERI DI KABUPATEN KUDUS TAHUN PELAJARAN 2015/2016 Malikhah, Siti; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Sujadi, Imam
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 8 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Program Studi Magister Pendidikan Matematika Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan UNS

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (294.8 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of the research was to determine the effect of learning models on learning achievement viewed from student learning creativity. The learning models compared were Think-Talk-Write with Mind Mapping (TTW-MM), Think-Talk-Write (TTW) and direct instruction model. The research used the quasi-experimental research method. The population of the research was all of the students in grade VIII of junior high schools in Kudus regency on academic year 2015/2016. The size of the sample was 275 students consisted of 91 students in the first experimental group, 92 students in the second experimental group, and 92 students in the third experimental group. The results of the research are as follows. (1) The students instructed with the learning model TTW-MM had learning achievement as good as those instructed with the learning model TTW, and a both of them better than direct instruction, the students instructed with the learning model TTW had learning  achievement better than those instructed with direct instruction. (2) The students with the high creativity had learning achievement better than those with the medium creativity and low creativity, the students with the medium creativity had learning achievement better than those with the low creativity. (3) In each learning model, the students with the high creativity had learning achievement better than those with the medium creativity and low creativity, the students with the medium creativity had learning achievement better than those with the low creativity. (4) In each learning style, the students instructed with the learning model TTW-MM had learning achievement better than instructed with the learning model TTW and direct instruction, the students instructed with the learning model TTW had learning  achievement better than those instructed with direct instruction.Keywords : Think-Talk-Write with Mind Mapping, Think-Talk-Write, direct instruction, creativity learning 
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE GROUP INVESTIGATION (GI) BERBASIS ASSESSMENT FOR LEARNING (AFL) MELALUI PENILAIAN SEJAWAT PADA MATERI PERSAMAAN GARIS LURUS DITINJAU DARI KEPERCAYAAN DIRI SISWA TERHADAP PRESTASI BELAJAR SISWA KELAS VIII Anggreini, Dewi; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Riyadi, Riyadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 8 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Program Studi Magister Pendidikan Matematika Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan UNS

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (251.611 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The objectives of this research were to find out in each category self confidence (high, medium, and low) which one providing better mathematics learning achievement, GI AfL with a peer assessment, GI, or direct learning  model. This research used the quasi experimental research method with the factorial design 3x3. Population of this research was all VIII graders of Junior High School of Surakarta Regency in the school year of 2015/2016. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling. The proposed hypothesis of the research were analyzed by using the two-way analysis of variance with unbalanced cell. The result of the research could be concluded as follows: in high and medium self confidence, GI based AfL with a peer assessment, GI, and direct learning model gave the same learning achievement; in low self confidence, GI based AfL with a peer assessment gave the same achievement as GI learning model, GI based AfL with a peer assessment and GI learning model gave better achievement than direct learning model; in GI based AfL with a peer assessment and GI, students with high, medium, and low self confidence had the same achievement; in direct learning model, students with high and medium self confidence had the same achievement, students with high and medium self confidence had better achievement than low self confidence.Keywords: GI Based AfL with a Peer Assessment, GI, Direct Learning, and Self Confidence

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 10

 1 

Filter by Year

2016 2016


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol 4, No 10 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 9 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 8 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 7 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 6 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 5 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 4 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 3 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 2 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 4, No 1 (2016): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 10 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 9 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 8 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 7 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 6 (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 1 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 10 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 9 (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 5 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 4 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 3 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 2 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 2, No 1 (2014): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 7 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 6 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 1, No 5 (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 1 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika More Issue