Analisis Time-Line dan Berpikir Kritis Dalam Pemecahan Masalah Matematika Pada Pembelajaran Kooperatif Resiprokal

Rochmad Rochmad, Arief Agoestanto, Ary Woro Kurniasih


Tujuan penelitian ini adalah mengetahui grafik time-line dalam diskusi untuk pemecahan masalah opened-ended dalam pembelajaran kooperatif resiprokal, mendeskripsikan langkah-langkah kegiatan pemecahan masalah open-ended dalam diskusi kelompok pada pembelajaran kooperatif resiprokal, dan mendeskripsikan karakteristik berpikir kritis siswa dalam menyelesaikan masalah open-ended. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian kualitatif. Kegiatan pada penelitian ini adalah pembelajaran resiprokal 2 kali untuk mendapatkan data time-line tahap berpikir kritis dan time-line aktivitas pemecahan masalah matematika, tes berpikir kritis 2 kali, analisis karakteristik berpikir kritis berdasarkan tes 1 dan 2. Sumber data dalam penelitian ini adalah siswa kelas VIII di SMP Negeri 1 Ngadirejo Temanggung. Hasil penelitian ini adalah 4 kelompok diskusi melakukan tahap strategi pada berpikir kritis lebih lama dibandingkan tahap berpikir kritis lainnya (klarifikasi, simpulan, dan strategi. Untuk memecahkan masalah matematika, pada langkah pertama yaitu memahami masalah. Pada langkah ini siswa dominan melakukan aktivitas bertanya dan memprediksi. Pada langkah kedua yaitu merencanakan penyelesaian, siswa dominan melakukan kegiatan bertanya dan menjelaskan. Pada langkah ketiga yaitu melaksanakan penyelesaian, siswa dominan melakukan kegiatan menjelaskan dan bertanya. Sedangkan pada langkah keempat yaitu mengecek kembali, siswa dominan melakukan kegiatan menjelaskan.

The purpose of this research is to know the time-line graph in the discussion for the solving of opened-ended problem in cooperative reciprocal learning, to describe the steps of open-ended problem solving activity in group discussion on reciprocal cooperative learning, and to describe the critical thinking characteristics of students in solving the open problem -ended. This research is a qualitative research. Activity in this research is reciprocal learning 2 times to get time-line data of critical thinking stage and time-line activity of problem solving of mathematics, critical thinking test 2 times, analysis of critical thinking characteristic based on test 1 and 2. Source of data in this research is student Class VIII in SMP Negeri 1 Ngadirejo Temanggung. The result of this research is 4 group discussion to do strategy phase on critical thinking longer than other critical thinking stage (clarification, conclusion, and strategy To solve mathematical problem, in step one that is understanding problem In this step student dominant doing activity of ask and predict In the second step is to plan the settlement, the dominant students do the activities of asking and explaining.In the third step is to carry out the settlement, the dominant students do activities explain and ask.While in the fourth step is to check again, the dominant students do explaining activities.


time-line; berpikir kritis; pemecahan masalah; pembelajaran kooperatif; resiprokal

Full Text:



Doolittle, P. E., Hicks, D., Triplett, C. F., Nichols, W. D., & Young, C. A. (2006). Reciprocal teaching for reading comprehension in higher education: A strategy for fostering the deeper understanding of texts. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17(2), 106-118.

Ennis, R. (1996). Critical Thinking. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hal

Hudojo, H. (2003). Pengembangan Kurikulum dan Pembelajaran Matematika. Surabaya: UM Press.

Jacob, S. M., & Sam, H. K. (2008, January). Critical Thinking Skills in Online Mathematics Discussion Forums and Mathematical Achievement. In Proceedings of the 13th Asian Technology Conference in Mathematics (ATCM 2008), Thailand (pp. 15-19).

Krulik, S & J.A. Rudnick. (1995). The New Sourcebook For Teaching Reasoning and Problem Solving In Elementary School. Boston: Allyn and Bacon

Mokoena, S. (2013). Engagement with and participation in online discussion forums. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 12(2).

Moleong, L. J. (2011). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.

Orszag, A. (2015). Exploring Finnish university students' perceived level of critical thinking.

Palmer, S. M. (2007). Critical thinking dispositions of part-time faculty members teaching at the college level. ProQuest.

Perkins, C., & Murphy, E. (2006). Identifying and measuring individual engagement in critical thinking in online discussions: An exploratory case study. Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 298-307.

Polya, G. (1973). How to Solve It: A new Aspct of Mathematical Method Second Edition. Princeton University Press: Princeton, New Jersey

Reed, J. H. (1998). Effect of a Model for Critical Thinking on Student Achievement in Primary Source Document Analysis and Interpretation, Argumentative Reasoning, Critical Thinking Dispositions, and History Content in a Community College History Course. Disertasi. Florida: University of South Florida.

Reilly, Y., Parsons, J., & Bortolot, E. (2009). Reciprocal teaching in mathematics. Mathematics of prime importance, Sunshine College, Victoria 8, 182-189.

Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, 334-370.

Schellens, T., Van Keer, H., De Wever, B., & Valcke, M. (2009). Tagging thinking types in asynchronous discussion groups: Effects on critical thinking. Interactive Learning Environments, 17(1), 77-94.


  • There are currently no refbacks.