cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Dewanta Arya Nugraha
Contact Email
dewanta.an@gmail.com
Phone
+6289673449687
Journal Mail Official
jmme@fkip.uns.ac.id
Editorial Address
Department of Mathematics Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta Jl. Ir. Sutami No. 36A Kentingan Surakarta 57126
Location
Kota surakarta,
Jawa tengah
INDONESIA
Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME)
Published by Universitas Sebelas Maret
ISSN : 20898878     EISSN : 27158276     DOI : https://dx.doi.org/10.20961/jmme
Core Subject : Education,
Education Mathematics
Journal Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) is a peer-refereed open-access journal which has been established for the dissemination of state-of-the-art knowledge in the field of mathematics and mathematics education. This journal was founded by the Magister of Mathematics Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret. It is published twice in a year (June and December). The JMME welcomes high-quality manuscripts resulted by researchers, scholars, teachers, and professionals from a research project in the scope of Pure Mathematics, Computing Mathematics, Statistics, Mathematics Learning, Evaluation and Assessment in Mathematics Learning, STEAM, Ethnomathematics, ICT in Mathematics Education, Design / Development Research in Mathematics Education
Arjuna Subject : Matematika - Matematika (Lain-Lain)
Articles 157 Documents
 1   2   3   4   5 
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF MURDER RME DAN MURDER PADA MATERI STATISTIKA DITINJAU DARI KEMANDIRIAN BELAJAR MATEMATIKA SISWA KELAS XI SMA Widyana Wahyuningtyas; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Sri Subanti
Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 6, No 2 (2016): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME)
Publisher : Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/jmme.v6i2.10054

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of the research was to determine the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement viewed from the student self-regulated learning. The learning models compared were MURDER (Mood Understand Recall Detect Elaborate Review) using RME (Realistic Mathematics Education) approach, MURDER, and direct learning. This study was a quasi-experimental research. The population of this study was students in grade XI science of Senior High School in Ponorogo on academic year 2015/2016. Instruments used were mathematics achievement test and questionnaire. Two ways anova with 3x3 of factorial design and significance level 0,05 are used for hypothesis test. The conclusions of the research were as follows. (1) MURDER RME gives better achievement than MURDER and direct learning, and MURDER gives the same achievement as direct learning, (2) students with high self-regulated learning has the same achievement as those who has middle self-regulated learning. Students who have high and middle self-regulated learning have better achievement than low self-regulated learning, (3) in the MURDER RME and MURDER, students who have high, middle, and low self-regulated learning have the same achievement. In the direct learning, students who have high self-regulated learning have the same achievement as those who have high and low self-regulated learning, and students who have high self-regulated learning have better achievement than those students who have low self-regulated learning, (4) for high self-regulated learning, MURDER RME produces better achievement than MURDER; MURDER RME and MURDER produce the same achievement as direct learning. For middle and lowself-regulated learning, MURDER RME, MURDER, and direct learning produce the same achievement which is categorized as good.Keywords: MURDER, RME, Self-Regulated Learning
PELABELAN TOTAL TAK REGULER PADA GRAF BARBEL Nugroho Arif Sudibyo; Siti Komsatun
Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 8, No 1 (2018): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME)
Publisher : Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/jmme.v8i1.25818

Abstract

Abstract:For example G (V, E) is a simple graph, a graph that do not contain of loops and parallel sides. Labeling of a graph is a mapping (function) that carries elements of a graph into positive or non-negative integers. Labeling power of irregular total point of a graph is a mapping f: VÈE ® {1, 2, 3, ..., k}which is called as labeling k total irregular point (vertex irregular total k-labeling) in G, if the weight of each different point at G is not the same, that is f(x) + ¹ f(u) + for each of the two points x and u that are different in G.Determination of exact value of irregular power of the total point is done by showing the value of lower limit and upper limit, both of them are proved to have equal value. The upper limit is decided by constructing a label, so that the largest label is obtained by minimum way. According to these two steps, a value for irregular power of the total point of a graph is obtained. In this paper, we will investigate irregular total labeling on barbell graph.Keywords:Point Irregular Total Labeling, Barbell.
On Non Inclusive Distance Vertex Irregularity Strength of Tadpole and Path Corona Path Graphs Muhammad Bilal; Diari Indriati; Vika Yugi Kurniawan
Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 10, No 1 (2020): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME)
Publisher : Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/jmme.v10i1.42405

Abstract

Let ???? = (????, ????) be a connected and simple graph with vertex set ????(????) and edge set????(????). A non inclusive distance vertex irregular labeling of a graph ???? is a mapping of ???? ∶ (????, ????) → {1, 2, … , ????} such that the weights calculated for all vertices are distinct. The weight of a vertex ????, under labeling ????, denoted by ????????(????), is defined as the sum of the label of all vertices adjacent to ???? (distance 1 from ????). A non inclusive distance vertex irregularity strength of graph ????, denoted by ????????????(????), is the minimum value of the largest label ???? over all such non inclusive distance vertex irregular labeling. In this research, we determined ????????????(????) from ????????,???? graph with ???? ≥ 3, ???? odd, ???????????? ???? ≥ 1 and ???????? ⊙ ???????? graph ????????????ℎ ???? ≥ 2 and ???? even.
Ethnomatematics In Mathematics Learning on The Perspective of Perenialism Philosophy Febria Dewi Pratiwi
Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 9, No 2 (2019): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME)
Publisher : Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/jmme.v9i2.48394

Abstract

Ethnomatematics in mathematics has the meaning as a new study that has the potential to be developed into the latest learning innovations containing a combination of contextual learning and at the same time introducing culture in Indonesia to learners. So that ethnomatematika can be used as a method of teaching and learning process in the field of mathematics. The view of mathematics learning as rationality and the principle of freedom which means freedom to learn to other objects without being bound by the provisions that are tightened through the culture around the environment. The research method used is the library research method. Information that has been collected and analyzed is secondary information in the form of research results including books, articles, and journals that correspond to the topic to be discussed. The authors examined some of the ideas, opinions, or findings contained in the literature, so that this study will provide theoretical information related to ethnomatematics in the study of mathematics on the perspective of perenialism. After being analyzed, the results of the analysis were associated and adapted to the ethnomatmatic context in mathematics learning in Junior High School (SMP) about the perspective of immortalism. So that the creation of students is free in expressing their observations in a happy and comfortable way. Although the main thing to note in perennials is students, teachers also have a role to play in the learning journey, but only as facilitators.
PENGGUNAAN INTERPOLASI HERMITE KUBIK DALAM PENYELESAIAN PERSAMAAN STURM-LIOUVILLE DENGAN METODE ELEMEN HINGGA Dwi Maryono
Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 1, No 1 (2011): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education
Publisher : Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/jmme.v1i1.9926

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Eigenvalue problems especially Sturm-Liouville equations often occur in physics. Homogenous Dirichlet or mixed boundary value problems can be constructed from these equations. The nontrivial solution from these equations can be obtained  using finite element methods. The purpose of this research is to obtain the details of  the  construction  of  finite  element  method  using  cubic  Hermite  interpolation  in    solving  Sturm-Liouville equations. The result shows that the solutions of the finite element method using cubic Hermite interpolation is  good  enough  in  solving  Sturm  Liouville  equation.  Based  on  the  example,  its  error  depends  on  the element’s length and the index of the eigenvalue or eigen function. Keywords : finite element, Sturm-Liouville, Hermite Interpolation, Eigen value
EKSPERIMENTASI PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA DENGAN MODEL PEMBELAJARAN PROBLEM SOLVING DAN MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE TEAM ASSISTED INDIVIDUALIZATION PADA POKOK BAHASAN PERSAMAAN DAN PERTIDAKSAMAAN LINEAR SATU VARIABEL DITINJAU DARI MINAT BELAJAR SISWA Eriska Fitri Kurniawati; Tri Atmojo Kusmayadi; Soeyono Soeyono
Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 2, No 2 (2012): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education
Publisher : Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/jmme.v2i2.9958

Abstract

Abstrak Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui: (1) manakah yang memberi prestasi belajar matematika yang lebih baik, siswa yang dikenai model pembelajaran Problem Solving atau model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe TAI. (2) manakah yang memberikan prestasi belajar matematika yang lebih baik, siswa yang mempunyai minat belajar tinggi, sedang, atau rendah. (3) pada masing-masing tingkatan minat belajar siswa (tinggi, sedang, dan rendah), manakah yang memberikan prestasi belajar lebih baik antara model pembelajaran Problem Solving atau model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe TAI.Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian  eksperimental semu dengan desain faktorial 2×3. Populasi penelitian ini adalah seluruh peserta didik SMP di Kabupaten Rembang. Pengambilan sampel dilakukan dengan teknik stratified cluster random sampling. Sampel dalam penelitian ini sebanyak 194 peserta didik, dengan rincian 94 siswa pada kelas eksperimen satu dan 100 siswa pada kelas eksperimen dua. Pengumpulan datanya dilakukan melalui tes pilihan ganda dan angket minat belajar siswa. Uji coba instrumen tes meliputi validitas isi, tingkat kesukaran, daya pembeda, dan realibilitas. Uji prasyarat meliputi uji normalitas populasi menggunakan metode Lilliefors dan uji homogenitas variansi populasi menggunakan Bartlett. Dengan α= 0,05, diperoleh simpulan bahwa sampel berasal dari populasi yang berdistribusi normal dan mempunyai variansi yang homogen. Pengujian hipotesis menggunakan analisis variansi dua jalan dengan sel tak sama.Berdasarkan hasil pengujian hipotesis, diperoleh simpulan bahwa: (1) model pembelajaran  Problem Solving memberikan prestasi belajar matematika siswa yang lebih baik dibandingkan dengan model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe TAI. (2) prestasi belajar matematika siswa yang mempunyai minat belajar tinggi lebih baik daripada siswa yang mempunyai minat belajar sedang maupun rendah dan siswa yang mempunyai minat belajar sedang mempunyai prestasi belajar yang sama baik dengan siswa yang mempunyai minat belajar rendah. (3) model pembelajaran Problem Solving memberikan prestasi belajar matematika yang lebih baik dibandingkan dengan model pembelajaran kooperatif tipe TAI baik untuk siswa dengan minat belajar tinggi, sedang, maupun rendah. Sedangkan prestasi belajar matematika siswa yang mempunyai minat belajar tinggi lebih baik daripada siswa yang mempunyai minat belajar sedang maupun rendah dan siswa yang mempunyai minat belajar sedang mempunyai prestasi belajar yang sama baik dengan siswa yang mempunyai minat belajar rendah baik untuk siswa yang diberi model pembelajaran Problem Solving maupun model pembelajaran kooperatif TAI.Kata Kunci : Minat Belajar, Pembelajaran kooperatif, Problem Solving, Team Assisted Individualization, Prestasi Belajar Matematika.
PROSES BERPIKIR SISWA TUNAGRAHITA RINGAN DALAM MEMECAHKAN MASALAH MATEMATIKA BENTUK SOAL CERITA PADA OPERASI HITUNG CAMPURAN Muhlishotul Hidayah; Imam Sujadi; Pangadi Pangadi
Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 4, No 1 (2014): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education
Publisher : Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/jmme.v4i1.9990

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of this research was to describe the thinking process of students with mild mental retardation in solving mathematics problems concerning with story questions in a mixed arithmetic operation. This research was a qualitative case study. The subjects of this research were the students of VIII C SLB Negeri Surakarta consisting of two students: a male and a female students. The procedure of selecting the subject used purposive sampling. The data of the research were collected by using think aloud method. To validate the data, the researcher used time triangulation. The techniques of analyzing the data were: (1) classifying the data into four categories based on Santrock steps: (a) finding and framing the problem, (b) developing problem-solving strategies, (c) evaluating solutions, and (d) rethinking and redefining the problem and solutions, and then reducing the data that are not included in four categories, (2) presenting the data in table, and (3) concluding thinking process of students with mild mental retardation in each category. The results of the research showed that: (a) finding and framing the problem: The two students began the activities by reading the questions, then the students kept silent while reexamining the questions, the students could not mention what was known and what was asked, the students waited for the instruction about what to do, the students could only reveal some information on what was known. To find out the information asked, the one of students got difficulty in mentioning what was asked shown by silent respond then read the questions again, and another student reexamined the questions and revealed the answers related to arithmetic operations. In framing the problem-solving strategy, these two students needed guidance to make strategy by linking the arithmetic operations, and another student also expresses problem-solving strategies that were not appropriate on the first step, (b) developing problem-solving strategies: these two students needed guidance in solving problems, another student solved problems based on the strategy that had been compiled by linking the arithmetic operations, while another student got difficulties when implementing different strategies. In the process of calculating, the students completed the calculation by compiling it downwards, and the students tended to use their hands as a means of calculation, (c) evaluating solutions: the student checked the answer by recalculating the answer, while another student only looked the answer at glance and believed in the answer, (d) rethinking and redefining the problems and solutions: these two students looked at the answer and revealed that no other idea/way in solving the problem.Key words: thinking process, mild mental retardation, problem solving, story questions. 
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN TEAM ASSISTED INDIVIDUALIZATION (TAI) DAN THINK PAIR SHARE (TPS) DENGAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK PADA MATERI FUNGSI DITINJAU DARI INTERAKSI SOSIAL Heri Cahyono; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Dewi Retno Sari Saputro
Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 5, No 2 (2015): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education
Publisher : Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/jmme.v5i2.10022

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 KOOPERATIF TIPE NHT (NUMBERED HEADS TOGETHER) DENGAN ASSESMENT FOR LEARNING (AfL) PADA MATERI HIMPUNAN DITINJAU DARI KECERDASAN INTRAPERSONAL SISWA SEKOLAH MENENGAH PERTAMA SE-KABUPATEN TULUNGAGUNG Addin Zuhrotul ‘Aini; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Dewi Retno Sari Saputro
Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 6, No 1 (2016): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME)
Publisher : Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/jmme.v6i1.10044

Abstract

Abstract: The aims of this study were to investigate: (1) among the model of NHT, NHT with AfL and classical model, which learning model can give better mathematics learning achievement. (2) which student’s have better mathematics learning achievement, those with high, medium, or low intrapersonal intelligence. (3) viewed from learning models, which student’s have better mathematics learning achievement those with high, medium or low intrapersonal intelligence. (4) viewed from intrapersonal intelligence, which learning model produces better mathematics learning achievement NHT with AfL, NHT or classical learning model. This research used quasi experimental method with its population included all of students  of state junior high  school  in  Tulungagung Regency.  Sampling was  done by stratified cluster random sampling technique. The size of the samples was 266 students. The data collection technique was include the documentation method to get 2013/2014 initial capability data before the experiment, achievement test for mathematics student’s achievements data, and questioner of intrapersonal intelligence. The data was analyzed  using analysis of variance. Based on the analysis, it can be concluded as follows. (1) The model of NHT with AfL providing better mathematics learning achievement than the model of NHT and classical, while the model of NHT providing better mathematics learning achievement than classical model. (2)  Students with high intrapersonal intelligence have better mathematics learning achievement than students with medium or low intrapersonal intelligence, students with medium intrapersonal intelligence have better mathematics achievement than student’s with low intrapersonal intelligence. (3) Viewed from learning models, student’s with high intrapersonal intelligence have better mathematics learning achievement than medium or low, and medium intrapersonal intelligence have better mathematics learning than low intrapersonal intelligence. (4) Viewed from intrapersonal intelligence, mathematics learning using NHT with AfL resulted students with better mathematics learning achievement than using NHT and classical learning model, learning mathematics using NHT resulted students with  better mathematics learning achievement than using classical learning model.Keywords: Numbered Head Together, Assessment for  Learning, Intrapersonal Intelligence
PENERAPAN MODEL PEMBELAJARAN TEAM ASSISTED INDIVIDUALIZATION (TAI) DAN TEAMS GAME TOURNAMENTS (TGT) PADA MATERI LINGKARAN DITINJAU DARI GAYA BELAJAR SISWA SMP DI KABUPATEN WONOGIRI Yustinus Murdoko; Mardiyana Mardiyana; Budi Usodo
Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 7, No 1 (2017): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME)
Publisher : Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/jmme.v7i1.20246

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of the research was to determine the effect of learning models on mathematics achievement viewed from the student learning style. The learning models compared were TAI (Team Assisted Individualization), TGT (Teams Games tournament) and direct teaching learning. The type of the research was quasi-experimental research. The population was the students of junior high school  in Wonogiri regency on academic year 2013/2014. The size of sample was 234 students consisted of 77 students in the first experimental group, 76 students on the second experimenta groupl, and 81 students on the tirth experimental group. The instruments used were mathematics achievement test, questioner, and the likert scale instrument. The data was analyzed using analisis of variance two way.  Conclusions of the research were as follow. (1) the learning achievement of the students instructed with the TAI learning model is the same as that of the students instructed with the TGT learning model, and the learning achievements of the students instructed with the TAI learning model and that of the students instructed with the TGT learning model are better than that of the students instructed with the direct learning model; (1) the learning achievement of the students instructed with the TAI learning model is the same as that of the students instructed with the TGT learning model, and the learning achievements of the students instructed with the TAI learning model and that of the students instructed with the TGT learning model are better than that of the students instructed with the direct learning model; (2) the students with the visual, auditory, and kinesthetic styles have the same learning achievement in Mathematics; (3) in each learning model, the students with the visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning styles have the same learning achievement in Mathematics; and (4) in each learning style, the learning achievement of the students instructed with the TAI learning model is the same as that of the students instructed with the TGT learning model, and the learning achievement of the students instructed with the TAI learning model and that of the students instructed with the TGT learning model are better than that of the students instructed with the direct learning model.Keywords: TAI, TGT, direct learning, learning style, achievement

Page 1 of 16 | Total Record : 157

 1   2   3   4   5 

Filter by Year

2011 2023


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol 13, No 1 (2023): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Vol 12, No 2 (2022): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Vol 12, No 1 (2022): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Vol 11, No 2 (2021): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Vol 11, No 1 (2021): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Vol 10, No 2 (2020): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Vol 10, No 1 (2020): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Vol 9, No 2 (2019): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Vol 9, No 1 (2019): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Vol 8, No 2 (2018): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Vol 8, No 1 (2018): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Vol 7, No 1 (2017): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Vol 6, No 2 (2016): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Vol 6, No 1 (2016): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education (JMME) Vol 5, No 2 (2015): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 5, No 1 (2015): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 4, No 2 (2014): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 4, No 1 (2014): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 2, No 2 (2012): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 2, No 1 (2012): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 1, No 2 (2011): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education Vol 1, No 1 (2011): Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education More Issue