<![CDATA[AbstrakTugas matematika di Indonesia didominasi oleh jenis closed task. Padahal untuk mempelajari penalaran imitatif dan kreatif, siswa harus berlatih berbagai macam jenis tugas di antaranya closed task dan open task. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk: mendeskripsikan desain closed task dan open task yang mampu mendorong munculnya penalaran imitatif dan kreatif. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian deskriptif kualitatif. Subjek dalam penelitian ini adalah siswa SMPN 4 Waru yang dipilih menggunakan teknik purposive sampling. Data dikumpulkan melalui teknik catatan lapangan, tes penalaran imitatif dan kreatif, serta wawancara berbasis tugas. Data dianalisis dengan cara membandingkan tabulasi terkait ketercapaian indikator tipe penalaran imitatif (MR dan AR) serta indikator tipe penalaran kreatif (LCR dan GCR) pada masing-masing tugas berdasarkan hasil wawancara dan hasil tes penalaran imitatif dan kreatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa closed task yang menanyakan rumus suku ke-n yang telah diketahui siswa akan memunculkan tipe MR, sebaliknya closed task yang berkaitan dengan penerapan rumus yang telah diketahui siswa untuk mencari suku selanjutnya dari suatu barisan bilangan akan memunculkan tipe AR. Open task yang menanyakan pola ke-n dari konfigurasi objek dan banyak melibatkan hal baru bagi siswa akan cenderung memunculkan tipe GCR, sebaliknya open task yang menanyakan suku selanjutya dari barisan bilangan dan tidak sepenuhnya baru/banyak melibatkan hal-hal yang telah diketahui siswa cenderung memunculkan tipe LCR. Kata kunci: Closed Task; Open Task; Penalaran Imitatif; Penalaran Kreatif. AbstractMathematical tasks in Indonesia are dominated by closed task type. However to learn imitative and creative reasoning that plays an important role in producing conclusions when completing assignments, students must practice various types of tasks including closed tasks and open tasks. Therefore, this study aims to: 1) describe the closed task and open task designs that encourage the emergence of imitative and creative reasoning, 2) describe the relationship between closed tasks and open tasks given with the emerging types of imitative and creative reasoning. This research is a design research and the subjects were 5 students of SMPN 4 Waru who selected by using purposive sampling technique. The data collection techniques used field notes, imitative and creative reasoning tests, and task-based interviews. In general, designing closed tasks and open tasks that encourage imitative and creative reasoning is carried out based on the stages of theories from Gravemeijer and Cobb. Start with compiling the HLT, designing assignments according to: 1) the 2013 curriculum, 2) the materials and assignments that students have encountered and never encountered, doing experiment, then the data obtained were analyzed using HLT theory. Giving closed tasks that asks for a formula that students known tends to bring up the MR type, while those related to the application of the formula tend to bring up the AR type. Giving open tasks that can be interpreted in a variety of ways and involves a lot of new things for students tends to bring up the GCR type, if it involves a lot of things that students already know it tends to bring up the LCR type. Keywords:Closed Task; Creative Reasoning; Imitative Reasoning; Open Task. ]]>
