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 369 Documents
 18   19   20   21   22 
PENGEMBANGAN MODEL INTUITION BASED LEARNING (IBL) DENGAN SCIENTIFIC APPROACH UNTUK MENINGKATKAN HASIL BELAJAR MATEMATIKA SISWA KELAS XI SMA NEGERI 2 SRAGEN Heryaningsih, Nok Yeni; Riyadi, Riyadi; Usodo, Budi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 9 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (270.756 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of the research was to produce Intuition Based Learning (IBL) model and supporting learning with Scientific Approach in solving problems to increase mathematics students’ achievement that valid, practical and effective. The type of the research was a Research and Development (R&D). The subjects of the research were grade XI MS 6 and XI MS 4 students of SMAN 2 Sragen, Central Java on Academic year 2014/2015. IBL model development process was adopt from Plomp and Borg & Gall development model. They were (1) Collect the informations and studying of theories in Preliminary Investigations Phase, (2) Design of IBL model and supporting learning material (Lesson Plan, Worksheet, Problem sheet, and learning paper) and then design research instruments, (3) Realize the IBL model and supporting learning material that was design to be First Draft, (4) Do validation of the first draft, testing the IBL model in the classroom, and then do revisions, (5) Conduct Focus Group Discussion (FGD) to evaluate the result of IBL model testing in the classroom, then will be revised to the next IBL model testing. The results of the reasearch were produce IBL model and supporting learning material (Lesson Plan, Worksheet, Problem sheet, and learning paper) with scientific approach in solving problems to increase mathematics students’ achievement that valid, practical and effective. These are steps of IBL model in the classroom, (1) Opening with apperception, motivations and build students’ positif perceptions, (2) Students divided into several groups, (3) Teacher explains the material generally, (4) Group discussion with 5M activity (based on Scientific approach), (5) Exercise to solve open ended problem individually with steps that could appear students’ intuition: Preparations, Inkubation, Ilumination and Verification, (6) Closure with review of students have learned or giving homework.Keywords: Development of model, Learning model, intuition, scientific approach, students’ achievement.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN PROBLEM BASED LEARNING (PBL), DISCOVERY LEARNING (DL), DAN COOPERATIVE LEARNING (CL) DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN INTERPERSONAL SISWA Sari, Berti Okta; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Sari S, Dewi Retno
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 6 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (357.035 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The objectives of this research were to investigate: (1) which learning model of the PBL, DL, and CL models results in a better achievement in mathematics; (2) which students of the students with high, moderate, and low interpersonal intelligences have a better learning achievement in mathematics; (3) in each interpersonal intelligence, which learning model of the PBL, DL, and CL models results in a better achievement in mathematics; and (4) in each learning model, which students of the students with high, moderate, and low interpersonal intelligences have a better learning achievement in mathematics. This research used the quasi experimental research method with the factorial design of 3 x 3. Its population was all of the students in Grade VIII of State Junior Secondary Schools of Bengkulu Selatan Regency, Bengkulu Province in Academic Year 2014/2015. The samples of research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique. The balance test of research used the one-way analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The pre-requisite test of ANAVA used Lilliefors’s normality test, Bartlett’s homogeneity test. The proposed hypotheses of research were tested by using the two-way analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The results of research are as follows: 1) the PBL model results in a better learning achievement in mathematics than the DL and CL models, and the DL model results in a better learning achievement in mathematics than the CL model; 2) the students with the high interpersonal intelligence have a better learning achievement in mathematics than those with the moderate and low interpersonal intelligences, and the students with the moderate interpersonal intelligence have a better learning achievement in Mathematics than those with the low interpersonal intelligence; 3) in each interpersonal intelligence level, the PBL model results in a better learning achievement in mathematics than the DL and CL models, and the DL model results in a better learning achievement in mathematics than the CL model; 4) in each learning model, the students with the high interpersonal intelligence have a better learning achievement in mathematics than those with the moderate and low interpersonal intelligences, and the students with the moderate interpersonal intelligence have a better learning achievement in mathematics than those with the low interpersonal intelligence.Keywords:  Problem-based learning, discovery learning, cooperative learning, interpersonal intelligence, learning achievement in Mathematics
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN PROBLEM BASED LEARNING DAN KOOPERATIF TIPE SNOWBALL THROWING DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA Safa’udin, Muhamad; Budiyono, Budiyono; Sari Saputro, Dewi Retno
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 8 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (304.084 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The objective of this research was to investigate the effect of the learning models on learning achievement viewed from learning style types of the students. The learning models compared were PBL, ST, and direct learning. The type of the research was quasi-experimental research with 3x3 factorial design. The population of this research was the students in grade VIII junior high school in Nganjuk City on academic year of 2014/2015. The size of the sample was 274 students, which was taken by using stratified cluster random sampling technique. The instruments used for data collection were learning style questionnaire and mathematics achievement test. The hypothesis test used unbalance two ways analysis of variance. The results of the research were as follow. (1) Mathematics achievement of students taught by Problem Based Learning and Snowball Throwing gave better than they taught by direct learning, and mathematics achievement of students taught by Problem Based Learning and Snowball Throwing was produce the same learning achievement (2) The learning styles of visual, auditory or kinesthetic was not have an influence on learning achievement. (3) In each learning model, the students with the visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning styles have an equal learning achievement in mathematics; (4) In each learning style, mathematics achievement of students taught by Problem Based Learning provide the same learning achievement with cooperative Throwing Snowball, and mathematics achievement of students taught by Problem Based Learning and Snowball Throwing was better than they taught by direct learning.Keywords: Problem Based Learning, Snowball Throwing, Direct Learning, Learning Style and Achievement.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN RESOURCE BASED LEARNING (RBL)DAN PROBLEM BASED LEARNING (PBL)DITINJAU DARI KEMAMPUAN KOMUNIKASI MATEMATIK PESERTA DIDIK KELAS XI SMA SEKABUPATEN KUDUS TAHUN 2013/2014 Apriliana, Arifa; Riyadi, Riyadi; Subanti, Sri
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 5 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (443.391 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of the research was to determine the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement viewed from the students mathematical communication skills. The learning models compared were RBL, PBL and Direct learning model. Data analysis techniques used to test the hypothesis was two-way analysis of variance with unbalanced cells. The conclusions of the research were as follows. 1) RBL and PBL learning models have produced the same mathematics achievement, but RBL and PBL learning models have produced the mathematics learning achievement better than Direct Learning. 2) learners who have high and medium mathematical communication skills have had the same mathematics achievement, and learners with medium and low mathematical communication skills also have the same mathematics achievement. But, learners with high mathematical communication skills have had a better mathematical achievement than learners with low mathematical communication skills. 3) learners with high mathematical communication skills who are learning by using RBL, PBL, and Direct learning model have had the same mathematics achievement. Learners with medium mathematical communication skills who are learning by using RBL, PBL, and Direct learning model also have had the same mathematics achievement. Learners with low mathematical communication skills who are learning by using RBL and PBL have had the same mathematics achievement, and who are learning by using PBL and Direct learning model also have had the same mathematics achievement, but learners with low mathematical communication skills who are learning by using RBL have had a better mathematical achievement than who are learning by using  Direct learning model. 4) In the RBL learning model, learners who have high, medium and low mathematical communication skills have had the same mathematics achievement. In the PBL learning model, learners who have high, medium and low mathematical communication skills also have had the same mathematics achievement. In the Direct learning model, learners who have high and medium mathematical communication skills have had the same mathematics achievement, and in the Direct learning model, learners who have medium and low mathematical communication skills also have had the same mathematics achievement, but in the Direct learning model, learners who have high mathematical communication skills have had a better mathematical achievement than learners with low mathematical communication skills.Keywords: Learning model, RBL, PBL, Direct learning model, Mathematical communication skills, and Mathematics achievement.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DENGAN PROBLEM POSING PADA POKOK BAHASAN PELUANG DITINJAU DARI ADVERSITY QUOTIENT (AQ) SISWA KELAS XI SMK DI KABUPATEN BOYOLALI Bahktiar, Hidayat; Usodo, Budi; Riyadi, Riyadi
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 10 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (244.452 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: This research aimed to find out: (1) which one gives better in mathematics learning achievement, learning model of Think Pair Share (TPS) with Problem Posing, Think Pair Share (TPS) or conventional, (2) which one have better in mathematics learning achievement, students having climbers, campers or quitters of Adversity Quotient, (3) in each learning model, which one have better mathematics learning achievement, students having climbers, campers or quitters of Adversity Quotient, (4) in each student’s level of Adversity Quotient which one gives better in mathematics learning achievement, learning model of TPS with Problem Posing, TPS or conventional. This research was a quasi-experimental research with 3 x 3 factorial design. The population of the research was all students class XI majors group technology, health and agriculture of SMK in Boyolali. The samples were chosen by using stratified cluster random sampling. The instruments that were used to collect the data were the documentation of mathematics achievement, questionnaire of Adversity Quotient and test of mathematics achievement. The technique of analyzing the data was two-ways ANOVA with unbalanced cells. The result of research showed as follows: (1) learning model of TPS with Problem Posing provided better learning achievement than model of TPS and conventional, learning model of TPS provided better learning achievement than conventional, (2) the students having climbers and campers had same achievement, and the students having climbers and campers had better  achievement than those having quitters, (3) in each learning model, the students having climbers and campers had the same achievement, and the students having climbers and campers had better achievement than those having quitters, (4) in each Adversity Quotient, learning model of TPS with Problem Posing provided better learning achievement than TPS and conventional, learning model of TPS provided better learning achievement than conventional.Keywords: Think Pair Share (TPS), Problem Posing, and Adversity Quotient (AQ)
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE PAIRS CHECK (PC), THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS), DAN PROBLEM BASED LEARNING (PBL) PADA MATERI KUBUS DAN BALOK DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA KELAS VIII SMP NEGERI SE-KOTA SURAKARTA Irawati, Suci; Budiyono, Budiyono; Slamet, Isnandar
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 7 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (315.146 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: This study aimed at determining the effect of learning models on the learning achievement in Mathematics viewed from the students’ Learning Style. The learning models compared were learning model Pairs Check (PC), Think Pair Share (TPS) and Problem Based Learning (PBL). This research was a quasi-experimental research with 3×3 factorial design. The population of research was all grade VIII students of Junior High School (SMP) in Surakarta. The samples were chosen by using stratified cluster random sampling. The instruments used were achievement test and questionnaire of learning styles. The technique of analyzing the data was two-ways ANOVA with unbalanced cells. The results of research showed as follows. (1) The PC resulted better learning achievement than the TPS and PBL. TPS resulted learning achievement as good as PBL, (2) The students having visual learning style resulted better learning achievement than did those having auditorial learning style. The students having visual learning style resulted better learning achievement than  those having kinesthetic learning style. The students having auditorial learning style resulted better learning achievement than those having kinesthetic learning style.  (3) At the students having visual learning style, PC resulted better learning achievement than that TPS and PBL, TPS and PBL resulted the same learning achievement. At the students having auditorial learning style, PC and TPS resulted the same learning achievement, PC resulted better learning achievement than that PBL, TPS resulted better learning achievement than that PBL. At the students having auditorial learning style, PC, TPS and PBL resulted the same learning achievement, (4) In PC, the students having visual learning style resulted learning achievement as good as those having auditorial learning style, the students having visual learning style resulted better learning achievement than did those having auditorial learning style, The students having auditorial learning style resulted learning achievement as good as those having kinestetik learning style. In TPS and PBL, The students having visual learning style resulted learning achievement as good as those having auditorial and kinestetik learning style.Keywords :  Pairs Check (PC), Think Pair Share (TPS), Problem Based Learning (PBL),  Learning Style.
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 Rosyidah, Ummi; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; 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 | Full PDF (339.719 KB)

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
PROSES METAKOGNISI DALAM PEMECAHAN MASALAH MATEMATIKA PADA SISWA KELAS XI DI SMA NEGERI BANYUMAS Kartika, Dwiani Listya; Riyadi, Riyadi; Sujadi, Imam
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 9 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (219.856 KB)

Abstract

Abstract : The purposes of this research were to describe: (1) metacognition process in mathematical problem solving linear programming subject matter of grade XI students with high academic ability in Banyumas State Senior High School, (2) metacognition process in mathematical problem solving linear programming subject of grade XI students with medium academic ability in Banyumas State Senior High School, and (3) metacognition process in mathematical problem solving linear programming subject matter of grade XI students with low academic ability in Banyumas State Senior High School. This research was a qualitative descriptive research and the subjects were grade XI students of Banyumas State Senior High School in academic year 2014/2015.  The subjects were selected based on specific criteria by using  snowball sampling technique. Data was collected by using interview based on problem solving tasks  and validity of the data was done by using time triangulation. Data validity was used to determine the metacognition process in mathematical problem solving from each research subject in each component metacognition process. The components were arranging the  strategy or action plan, controlling or monitoring the actions, and evaluating  the action. Results showed that students with high, medium, and low academic ability realized their thinking process by identifying the information of the problem when arranged the action plan. However, there are students with low academic ability can not recall their prior knowledge previously required. They also can not make the  plan solutions are used. The plans solution are knowing the concepts that will be used and estimating the time required to complete it. Furthermore, when monitored the actions, all of subjects from high, medium, and low academic ability had tried to realize their thinking process when explained the problem solving procedures by verifying and clarifying the results of their written work and identifying the  strategies while expressing the reason of the strategies are used. The students with high and  medium academic ability developed their plan action solutions prepared in accordance with the plan. However, there are students with low academic ability  who have not been able to develop all plans prepared solution according to their plans. Furthermore, only students with high academic ability who are able to evaluate or assess the results of their written work properly despite there are some  students with low academic ability  who can do it too.Keywords: Metacognition Process, Mathematical Problem Solving, Academic Ability
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL MODEL PEMBELAJARAN PROBLEM BASED LEARNING (PBL), GROUP INVESTIGATION (GI) DAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) PADA MATERI BANGUN RUANG SISI DATAR DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS SISWA Hidayati, Dwi; Mardiyana, Mardiyana; Sari Saputro, Dewi Retno
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 8 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (308.095 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 problem based learning, group investigation and think pair share. This research used the quasi-experimental research method. The population of the research was all of the students in Grade VIII of Junior Secondary Schools of Banyumas Regency. The samples of the research were taken by using the stratified cluster random sampling technique. The sample of research consisted of 295 students. Techniques of collecting data used were documentation, test, and questionnaire. Balance test used one way ANOVA test. From the research, it can be concluded as follows. (1) Learning model of PBL gave better mathematics learning achievement than model of GI and TPS, model of GI gave better mathematics learning achievement than model of TPS, (2) students who have high creativity gave better mathematics learning achievement than students who have medium and low creativity, students who have medium creativity gave better mathematics learning achievement than students who have low creativity, (3) in the students with high and low creativity, the GI learning model gave the same learning achievement in mathematics with the PBL and TPS learning model, the PBL learning model gave better learning achievement in mathematics the TPS learning model. The PBL, GI and TPS learning model gave the same learning achievement in mathematics, (4) in the PBL and GI learning model, the learning achievement in mathematics of the students with high creativity were better than the students with medium and low creativity, the students with medium and low creativity gave same the learning achievement in mathematics. In the TPS learning model, the students with high and medium creativity gave the same learning achievement in mathematics, the learning achievement in mathematics of the students with the high and medium creativity were better than the students the low creativity.Keywords: Problem Based Learning, Group Investigation, Think Pair Share, Student Learning Creativity
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE GROUP INVESTIGATION, THINK-PAIR-SHARE, DAN PROBLEM BASED LEARNING DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK PADA MATERI EKSPONEN DAN LOGARITMA DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS SISWA KELAS X SMA NEGERI KABUPATEN PACITAN Suprapto, Suprapto; Kusmayadi, Tri Atmojo; Sujadi, Imam
Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Vol 3, No 5 (2015): Pembelajaran Matematika
Publisher : Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (307.024 KB)

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of this research was to know the influence of teaching and learning models with the scientific approach toward the students’ achievement in learning mathematics considered from the creativity of the students. Teaching and learning models to be compared were GI, TPS, and PBL. This research was chategorized as a quasi experimental research. The population was all students of grade X MIA public SMAs in Pacitan regency in the year 2014/2015. The sampling technique used was stratified cluster random sampling. The method of data collection were documentation, questionaire, and test. Hypothesis testing was performed using two-way analysis of variance with unequal cells. The conclusions of this research were as follows. 1. The students’ achievement in mathematics given GI-S model was better than those who were given TPS-S model, while the students’ achievement given GI-S was the same as those who were given PBL-S model, and the students’ achievement given TPS-S model was the same as those who were given  PBL-S model;  2. The mathematics achievement of the students who had high level creativity was the same as those who had  medium level creativity, while those who had  high level creativity was better than those who had  low level creativity, and the students with medium level gave the same achievement as those with low level creativity; 3. In high level creativity, the students’ achievement in learning mathematics using GI-S model was the same as those using TPS-S and PBL-S models. In medium level creativity, the students using GI-S model gave the same achievement as those using TPS-S and PBL-S models, but the students’ achievement using  PBL-S model was better than using TPS-S model. In low level creativity, the students who learned mathematics using GI-S model gave the same achievement as those who used TPS-S and PBL-S models, and the students’ achievement using TPS-S model was the same as those using PBL-S model; 4. In learning mathematics using GI-S model, the students with high, medium, and low level creativity gave the same achivement. In using TPS-S model, the students with high, medium, and low level creativity gave the same achievement. In using PBL-S, the students with high level creativity had the same achievement as those who had medium and low level creativity, but the students with medium level creativity gave better achievement than those who had low level creativity.Keywords: Group Investigation (GI), Think Pair Share (TPS), Problem Based Learning (PBL), Scientific approach, Creativity

Page 20 of 37 | Total Record : 369

 18   19   20   21   22 

Filter by Year

2013 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