Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 899 Download : 587

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to develop the didactical design concerning on the cube and cuboid surface concept. This study use Didactical Design Research measure in which it consists of three phases: (1) analysis of the didactic situation before learning that the form of design didactic hypothetical, (2) metapedadidactic analysis, and (3) retrospective analysis linked the results of analysis didactic situation hypothetical analysis and metapedadidactic analysis. This study has 96 secondary school’s students in the Cilegon city as research subjects. All datas were documented by using camera recording, interviews, and tests. The datas were analyzed qualitatively to determine the learning obstacle then researcher also compiled didactic design incorporating didactic pedagogical anticipation based on identified learning obstacles. Furthermore, the didactic design is implemented and analyzed the results of its implementation as a final product. The results obtained are a didactic concept design model surface area of cube and cuboid.

Keywords

didactical design; the surface area of cube and cuboid; learning obstacle;

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Dickinson, P., Eade, F., Gough, F., & Hough, S. (2010). “Using Realistic Mathematics Education with low to middle attaining pupils in secondary schools”. Jurnal. Proceedings of the British Congress for mathematics Education, hlm. 73 – 80.
  2. Kariadinata, R. (2010). “Kemampuan Visualisasi Geometri Spasial Siswa Madrasah Aliyah Negeri (MAN) Kelas X Melalui Software Pembelajaran Mandiri”. Jurnal EDUMAT 1.
  3. Kwon, O.N., et.al., 2013. Design Research as an Inquiry into Students’ Argumentation and Justification: Focusing on the Design of Intervention. In T. Plomp, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research–Part B: Illustrative cases (pp. 199-220). Enschede, the Netherlands: SLO
  4. Oktorizal, Elniati, S., & Suherman. (2012). Peningkatan Level Berpikir Siswa pada Pembelajaran Geometri dengan Pendekatan Pendidikan Matematika Realistik. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, Vol. 1 No. 1 Part 2: hlm. 60-67.
  5. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
  6. Saleh, M. (2012). Pembelajaran Kooperatif Dengan Pendekatan Pendidikan Matematika Realistic (PMR). Jurnal Pendidikan Serambi Ilmu Volume 13 Nomor 2, hlm. 51–59.
  7. Sarjiman, P. (2006). Peningkatan Pemahaman Rumus Geometri melalui Pendekatan Realistik di Sekolah Dasar. Cakrawala Pendidikan No. 1, hlm. 73 – 92.
  8. Sembiring R. K., Hadi S., & Dolk, M. (2008). Reforming Mathematics Learning in Indonesia Classrooms Through RME. ZDM Mathematics Education 40, pp. 927 – 939
  9. Simon, M. A. (1995). Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, pp. 114 – 145.
  10. Suryadi, D. (2010). Menciptakan Proses Belajar Aktif: Kajian Dari Sudut Pandang Teori Belajar dan Teori Didaktik. Makalah disajikan pada Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Matematika di UNP.
  11. Syahputra, E. (2013). Peningkatan Kemampuan Spasial Siswa Melalui Penerapan Pembelajaran Matematika Realistik. Cakrawala Pendidikan No. 3.
  12. Van de Walle, J. A. 1994. Elementary School Mathematics: Teaching Devolementally (2 nd Edition). New York : Longman
  13. Wulandari, R., Sunardi, & Indah, A. (2014). Pengembangan Perangkat Pembelajaran Berbasis Pembelajaran Matematika Realistik Pokok Bahasan Kubus dan Balok. Pancaran, Vol. 3, No. 1, hlm. 131-140.