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 10 Documents
 1 
Search results for , issue "Vol 1, No 1 (2013): Pembelajaran Matematika" : 10 Documents clear
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE STUDENT TEAMS ACHIEVEMENT DIVISIONS (STAD) DENGAN PENDEKATAN PROBLEM SOLVING DITINJAU DARI AKTIVITAS BELAJAR SISWA Ignatius Dono Arianto
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: The aim of the research was to determine the effect of learning models on learning achievement viewed from the student learning activity. The learning models compared were cooperative learning STAD with problem solving approach, cooperative learning STAD and conventional learning. The type of the research was a quasi-experimental research. The population was the students of high school in Merauke regency on academic year 2012/2013. The size of the sample was 291 students consisted of 98 students in the first experimental group, 100 students in the second experimental group and 93 students in the control group. The instruments used were questionnaire, and learning achievement test. The data was analyzed using analysis of variance. The conclusions of the research were as follows. (1) STAD with problem solving approach gives better learning achievement than STAD and conventional, and STAD gives better learning achievement than conventional. (2) The students with high learning activity have better learning achievement than the students with middle and low learning activity, and the students with middle learning activity have better learning achievement than the students with low learning activity. (3) For students with high learning activity, both STAD with problem solving approach and STAD, STAD and conventional give the same effectiveness, but STAD with problem solving approach is better than conventional. In the meantime, for students with middle and low learning activity, all learning models give the same effectiveness. (4) For using of STAD with problem solving approach and conventional, both the students with high and middle learning activity, the students with middle and low learning activity have the same learning achievement, but the students with high learning activity have better learning achievement than the students with low learning activity. In the meantime, for using of STAD, all students learning activities have the same learning achievement.Key words: Student Teams Achievement Divisions (STAD), problem solving approach, student learning activity, 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
EKSPERIMENTASI PENDEKATAN PENDIDIKAN MATEMATIKA REALISTIK (PMR) DENGAN METODE DISCOVERY LEARNING PADA MATERI POKOK BENTUK ALJABAR DITINJAU DARI KEMAMPUAN KOMUNIKASI MATEMATIS Jamilah Jamilah
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: The aim of this research was to reveal the effect of PMR approach with discovery learning method, PMR approach, and directed instruction approach to the mathematics achievement in Algebra Expression viewed from mathematics communication ability. The type of this research was a quasi experimental by 3x3 factorial design. The population in this research was the seventh grade students of junior high school in Pontianak in the academic year 2012/2013. The total of sample was 9 classes and it was taken using stratified cluster random sampling technique. The instrument of research using mathematics achievement test and mathematics communication ability test. The data was analyzed using unbalanced two-way analysis of variance. The conclusion of this research shows that PMR approach with discovery learning method, PMR approach and directed instruction approach give the same mathematics achievement and it shows the same result in each level of mathematics communication ability. Other conclusion also shows that the students who have high mathematics communication ability have better mathematics achievement than the students who have middle or low mathematics communication ability, the students who have middle mathematics communication ability have better mathematics achievement than the students who have low mathematics communication ability, and it shows the same result in each learning approach categories.Key words: PMR Approach, Discovery Learning Method, Directed Instruction Approach, Mathematics Communication Ability, Mathematics Achievement.
KARAKTERISTIK PENALARAN SISWA KELAS XI SEKOLAH MENENGAH ATAS TENTANG SAMPEL Muhammad Saifuddin Zuhri
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 describe how the reasoning characteristics of the 11th students of Senior High School about samples. This study was a descriptive qualitative research. The subject of research was the 11th students of SMA Negeri 1 Purwodadi consisting of two students for each level of mathematics competency. The subject selection criteria were based on student mathematics competency and opinion expressing competency, either in spoken and written form. The data was collected using written test and interview technique. The data analysis was done based on the data on written test and interview results. Then the method triangulation was run to produce a valid data from the research subject. The result of research showed that the students with low mathematics competency were at level 1 with the following characteristics: the students can give example of sample, can describe term of sample, approve the small number of sample selection in the research, do not recommend appropriate selection in sample taking. The students with medium mathematics competency were at level 2 with the following characteristics: the students can give example about the sample, can describe term of sample, combine small size with appropriate selection methods or large sample size with inappropriate selection methods. Some students with high mathematics competency were at level 2 and some other were at level 3 with the following characteristics: the students can give example about sample, can describe term of sample, recommend of the larger size sampling from the population, recommend the selection through random sampling technique and can explain the procedures randomly, and can identify the potentially biased sampling in a research.Keywords: Reasoning, Reasoning about Sample, Sample Concept, Reasoning Characteristics about Sample.
EFEKTIVITAS MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE CONCEPT MAPPING GROUP RESUME(CMGR) DAN CONCEPT MAPPING (CM) DITINJAU DARI MOTIVASI PESERTA DIDIK Arlin Astriyani
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 study aimed to investigate: (1) which type more effective, a CMGR type, a CM type, or a Direct Instruction, (2) which one had a better mathematics achievement, students who had high, middle or low motivation students, (3) in each CMGR type, a CM type or Direct Instruction model, which one had a better mathematics achievement, students who had high, middle, or low motivation (4) in each motivation students (high, middle and low), which one more effective, students taught by a CMGR type, a CM type, or a Direct Instruction. We used the fifth grade students of elementary school in Nusawungu Subdistrict as the population. This study was a quasi experimental research by 3 x 3 factorial design. The instruments used to collect data are prior ability test in mathematics, a motivation questionnaire and achievement test in mathematics. The data were analyzed using unbalanced two ways analysis of variance. Based on the data analyzed, it was concluded that: (1) a CMGR type had better mathematics achievement than a CM type and a Direct Intruction, and a CM type had better mathematics achievement than a Direct Instruction, (2) the high motivation students had better mathematics achievement than the middle and low motivation students, and the middle motivation students had better mathematics achievement than the low motivation students, (3) for all types of learning model, high motivation students had better mathematics achievement than middle and low motivation students, (4) for high and middle motivation students, a CMGR type more effective than a CM type and Direct Instruction, and for low motivation students, a CM type more effective than a CMGR type and Direct Instruction.Keywords : Concept Mapping Group Resume (CMGR), Concept Mapping (CM), Direct Instruction, Motivation, Mathematics Achievement.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE STUDENT TEAMS ACHIEVEMENT DIVISION (STAD) DAN TEAMS GAMES TOURNAMENT (TGT) PADA MATERI POKOK DIMENSI TIGA DITINJAU DARI AKTIVITAS BELAJAR SISWA SMA KELAS X DI KABUPATEN MAGETAN TAHUN PELAJARAN 2011/2012 Estu Hari Prabawanti
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 : The aims of this research were to know: (1) which one has a better learning achievement between cooperative learning STAD, TGT, and conventional learning, (2) which one has a better learning achievement; the students having high, medium, or low learning activity, (3) which one gives a better learning achievement based on their high, medium, and low learning activity between cooperative learning STAD, TGT and conventional learning. The population of the research was the whole students of tenth grade of senior high school in Magetan. The sampling technique was done withstratified cluster random sampling. Based on the result of data analysis, it can be concluded: (1) The cooperative learning STAD gave a better learning achievement than TGT, TGT gave a better achievement than conventional learning, and STAD gave a better learning than conventional learning. (2) The students with higher learning activity had a better learning achievement than the students with lower learning activity. (3) For studentshaving high learning activity, cooperative learning STAD had a better learning achievement than TGT and conventional learning, and cooperative learning TGT and conventional learning had the same learning achievement.For students having medium learning activity, cooperative learning STAD and TGT had the samelearning achievement and so didTGTand conventional learning, however, cooperative learning STAD had a better learning achievement than conventional learning. For students havinglow learning activity, cooperative learning STAD, TGT, and conventional learning had the same learning achievement.Keywords: Student Teams Achievement Division, Team Games Tournament,conventional , activity.
EKSPERIMENTASI MODEL PEMBELAJARAN PROBLEM SOLVING DAN PROBLEM POSING BERBANTUAN ALAT PERAGA DITINJAU DARI KREATIVITAS BELAJAR SISWA Nurmaningsih Nurmaningsih
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 reaserch aimed to reveal the effect of a Problem Solving and a Problem Posing learning model assisting by media instrument to the mathematics achievement based on the students’ learning creativity. We used the second grade students of Junior High Schools in Pontianak as the population. This was a 3 x 3 factorial design quasi-experimental research. The techniques of data collection were a test, questionnaires and documentation method. The balance test, a prerequisite tests analysis (normality and homogeneity test), and hypothesis test using unbalanced two ways analysis of variance were the techniques of data analysis that used in this research. The result indicates: (1) a Problem Solving learning model assisting by media instrument gives the same mathematics achievement as a Problem Posing learning model assisting by media instrument, but it gives better mathematics achievement than a directed learning; Furthermore, there is no difference of mathematics achievement between a Problem Posing learning model assisting by media instrument and a directed learning; (2) the students with high, medium an low learning creativity have the same mathematics achievment; (3) for all category of the learning creativity, a Problem Solving learning model assisting by media instrument gives the same mathematics achievement as a Problem Posing learning model assisting by media instrument, but it gives better mathematics achievement than a directed learning; Furthermore, there is no difference of mathematics achievement between a Problem Posing learning model assisting by media instrument and a directed learning; (4) for all category of the learning models, the students with high, medium an low learning creativity have the same mathematics achievment.Key words : Problem Solving assisting by media instrument, Problem Posing assisting by media instrument, directed learning, learning creativity, mathematics achievement
EKSPERIMENTASI PEMBELAJARAN KOOPERATIF TIPE STAD DENGAN PENDEKATAN OPEN-ENDED PADA POKOK BAHASAN LOGARITMA DITINJAU DARI GAYA BERPIKIR DAN KREATIVITAS PESERTA DIDIK KELAS X SMA NEGERI SE-KABUPATEN GUNUNG KIDUL TAHUN PELAJARAN 2012/2013 Mella Yuliani
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:The aim of the research was to determine and comparecooperative learning model of the STAD type with the open-ended approach and STAD viewed from the thinking style and the creativity of toward learners student mathematics learning achievement.This research used the quasi-experimental research method with the factorial design of 2 x 2 x 2. Its population was all of the students in Grade X of State Senior Secondary Schools in Gunungkidul in Academic Year 2012/2013.Based on the results of the data analyses, the conclusions were as follows. 1) The cooperative learning model of the STAD type with the open-ended resulted in a better learning achievement than the STAD type. 2) The students with the sequential thinking style have a better learning achievement than those with the random thinking style. 3) The students with the high creativity have a better learning achievement than those with the low creativity. 4)(a) In the sequential thinking style, the students treated to the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with the open-ended approach have the same learning achievement as those treated with the STAD type; and (b) In the random thinking style, students treated to the cooperativelearning model of the STAD type with the open-ended approach have a better learning achievement than those treated with the STAD type. 5)(a) in the high creativity, the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with the open-ended approach results in a better learning achievement than that of the STAD type; and (b) in the low creativity, the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with the open-ended approach results in the same learning achievement as that of the STAD type. 6) (a) In the high creativity, the students with the sequential thinking style have a better learning achievement than those with the random thinking style; (b) In the low creativity, the students with the sequential thinking style have the same learning achievement as those with the random thinking style; (c) in the sequential thinking style, the students with the high creativity have a better learning achievement than those with the low creativity; and (d) In the random thinking style, the students with the high creativity have the same learning achievement as those with the low creativity. 7) In the sequential thinking style with the high creativity and the low creativity and in the random thinking style with the low creativity, the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with the open-ended approach results in the same learning achievement as that of the STAD type,and in the random thinking style with the high creativity, the cooperative learning model of the STAD type with theopen-ended approach results in a better learning achievement than thatof the STAD type.Keywords: Learning achievement in Mathematics, STAD, open-ended, thinking style, and creativity.
PENGEMBANGAN KURIKULUM BERDIFERENSIASI MATA PELAJARAN MATEMATIKA SMA UNTUK SISWA CERDAS ISTIMEWA DAN BERBAKAT ISTIMEWA DI KELAS AKSELERASI Murtianto, Yanuar Hery
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: The research was aimed at: (1) formulating the needs of mathematics curriculum for gifted and talented students in acceleration class; (2) developing model prototype of differentiated mathematics curriculum of senior high school in acceleration class; (3) finding out the appropriateness of the differentiated mathematics curriculum that was developed.Research and development method was used to produce the model of mathematics curriculum. This method consisted of some steps, namely: (1) the preliminary step including field observation and literary research; (2) the development step including mathematics curriculum analysis and prototype design to be model differentiated mathematics curriculum; and (3) evaluation step to examine the final design of differentiated mathematics curriculum.Findings of the results were: 1) the need of the mathematics is concerned with: (a) the repetition of material minimum, (b) the effectiveness of the compacting of time (c) encourage gifted and talented students to think at a high level, (d) in accordance with the national curriculum tailored to the guidelines for the implementation of accelerated learning program (e) relative ready to use on the condition that a minimum school, 2) to develop a prototype model of differentiated curriculum in high school math class acceleration is done by: (a) analytical standards of competence and competence elementary school and high school mathematics, (b) identify standards and basic competencies based on the revised Bloom's taxonomy, (c) mapping standards and basic competencies essential, (d) the escalation of basic competence, (e) develop an indicator based on the escalation of basic competence, ( f) determine the allocation of time on each indicator, (g) organize competency standards, basic competency and escalated of indicators into structure of the semester (h) determine the allocation of time in each half, and 3) the results of the evaluation showed: (a) from in terms of the feasibility of the content of the prospective users of the respondent, the result that differentiated curriculum is good since was responded very good and good as big as 95%, (b) in terms of linguistic, with the result that differentiated curriculum is good since was responded good as big as 100%, (c) the presentation of the curriculum in terms the result that differentiated curriculum was developed is good since was responded very good and good as big as 95%, and (d) in terms of the potential users of the product from graphic, the result that differentiated curriculum is good since was responded very good and good as big as 100%. Besides the evaluation of the design is also made evaluation of differentiated mathematics curriculum content that includes seven components: (a) an accelerated rate of learning by repetition at least 75% of respondents gave very appropriate responses, 25% responded accordingly, (b) control the national curriculum (KTSP) in a shorter time 100% of respondents responded very appropriate, (c) material that is abstract, complex and deep 100% of respondents responded accordingly, (d) the use of skills learned in applying problem-solving strategies 75% of respondents said the suit, 25% of respondents said quite appropriate, (e) oriented learners 100% of respondents said that accordingly, (f) to apply research skills appropriate 75% of respondents said that, 25% said quite appropriate, and (g) motivate students to learn independent is responsed appropriate by the respondent of 100%.Key words: Differentiated Mathematics Curriculum, Gifted, Acceleration.
PROFIL RESPONS SISWA DALAM MEMECAHKAN MASALAH ALJABAR BERDASARKAN TAKSONOMI SOLO DITINJAU DARI MINAT BELAJAR MATEMATIKA Laisouw, Ruslan
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: The objective of this research is to investigate the profile of response in solving SOLO taxonomy-based algebra problems of the students in Grade VIII with the high, medium, and low Mathematics learning interests. Structure of Observed Learning Outcome (SOLO) taxonomy is a framework to classify the students’ response comprising 4 levels. The subjects of the research consisted of six students in Grade VIII of MTA junior Secondary School of Gemolong, Sragen in academic year 2011/2012.The instrumen used were test instrument, and the interview guideline.the data analysis so as to find out the response in solving SOLO taxonomy-based algebra problems.The results of the research are as follows. The response levels in solving SOLO taxonomy-based algebra problems of two subjects with the high Mathematics learning interest belong to extended abstract level (level 4).The response levels of two subjects with the medium Mathematics learning interest in solving SOLO taxonomy-based algebra problems are different from one to the other; one of them has the relational level (level 3) while the other has the multi-structural level (level 2). For this case, the students with the same Mathematics learning interest category (medium level) have the have different response.The response levels of two subjects with the low Mathematics learning interest in solving SOLO taxonomy-based algebra problems are also different from one to the other; one of them has the multi-structural level (level 2) while the other has uni-structural level (level 1). For this case, the students with the same Mathematics learning interest category (low level) have the different response.Key words: Students’ response level, algebra problems, SOLO taxonomy, and Mathematics learning interest

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 10

 1 

Filter by Year

2013 2013


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