Asmara, A. S., Waluya, S.B., & Rochmad, R. (2017). Analisis Kemampuan Literasi Matematika Siswa Kelas X Berdasarkan Kemampuan Matematika. Scholaria, 7(2), 135-142.
Fadholi, T., & Waluya, B. (2015). Analisis Pembelajaran Matematika dan Kemampuan Literasi serta Karakter Siswa SMK. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research, 4(1).
Thompson, D. R., & Kaur, B. (2011). Using a Multi-Dimensional Approach to Understanding to Assess Students' Mathematical Knowledge. In Assessment In The Mathematics Classroom: Yearbook 2011, Association of Mathematics Educators (pp. 17-31).
Lestiyaningsih, H., Hobri, H., & Kristiani, A. I. (2013). Penerapan pembelajaran quick on the draw untuk meningkatkan hasil belajar matematika pada sub pokok bahasan aritmetika sosial siswa kelas VII F semester ganjil SMP Negeri 10 Jember tahun ajaran 2012/2013. KadikmA, 4(2).
Madyaratri, D. Y., Wardono, W., & Kartono, K. (2020). Mathematics Literacy Skill Seen from Learning Style in Discovery Learning Model with Realistic Approach Assisted by Schoology. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research, 48-54.
Mahdiansyah, A & Rahmawati. (2014). Literasi Matematika Siswa Pendidikan Menengah: Analisis Menggunakan Desain Tes Internasional dengam Konteks Indonesia. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. 20 (4), 452 – 469.
Maimunah, S., & Nasution, S. P. (2018). Aktivitas Quick On The Draw dalam Tatanan Pembelajaran Kooperatif Ditinjau dari Self Confidence pada Materi Peluang. Desimal: Jurnal Matematika, 1(3), 275-284.
Malasari, P. N. (2019). Kontribusi habits of mind terhadap kemampuan literasi matematis siswa pada materi geometri. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 2(2).
Nuurjannah, P. E. I., Hendriana, H., & Fitrianna, A. Y. (2018). Faktor Mathematical Habits of Mind dan Kemampuan Literasi Matematis Siswa SMP di Kabupaten Bandung Barat. Jurnal Mercumatika: Jurnal Penelitian Matematika Dan Pendidikan Matematika, 2(2), 51-58.
OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 Results in Focus. New York: Columbia University.
Gurria, A. (2016). PISA 2015 results in focus. PISA in Focus, (67), 1.
Purwasih, R., Sari, N. R., & Agustina, S. (2018). Analisis Kemampuan Literasi Matematik dan Mathematical Habits of Mind Siswa SMP pada Materi Bangun Ruang Sisi Datar. Numeracy Journal, 5(1), 67-76.
Qadarsih, N. D. (2017). Pengaruh Kebiasaan Pikiran (Habits of Mind) terhadap Penguasaan Konsep Matematika. SAP (Susunan Artikel Pendidikan), 2(2).
Riyandiarto, B. B., & Hidayah, I. (2015). Analisis Pemahaman Matematika Siswa SMP dengan Pendekatan SPUR (Skills, Properties, Uses, dan Representation). Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research, 4(1).
Safitri, P. T. (2017). Analisis Habits Of Mind Matematis Siswa SMP Di Kota Tangerang. AKSIOMA: Jurnal Program Studi Pendidikan Matematika, 6(2), 205-217.
Siregar, N. C., & Marsigit, M. (2015). Pengaruh pendekatan discovery yang menekankan aspek analogi terhadap prestasi belajar, kemampuan penalaran, kecerdasan emosional spiritual. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 2(2), 224-234.
Stacey, K. (2011). The PISA View of Mathematical Literacy in Indonesia. Indonesian Mathematical Society Journal on Mathematics Education, 2(2), 95-126.
Stecey, K & Tuner, R. (2015). Assessing Mathematical Literacy: The PISA experience. Australia: Springer.
Wardono, M. S., & Mariani, S. (2014). The Realistic Learning Model With Character Education And PISA Assessment To Improve Mathematics Literacy. International Journal of education and Research, 2 (7), 361-372.
Wardono., Mariani, S., Candra, S.D.(2015). Mathematics Literacy on Problem Based Learning with Indonesian Realistic Mathematics Education Approach Assisted E-Learning Edmodo. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 693 (2016) 012014.
Wardono, W., & Kurniasih, A. W. (2015). Peningkatan Literasi Matematika Mahasiswa Melalui Pembelajaran Inovatif Realistik E-Learning Edmodo Bermuatan Karakter Cerdas Kreatif Mandiri. Kreano, Jurnal Matematika Kreatif-Inovatif, 6(1), 95-102.
Wardono., Mariani,S., Rahayuningsih R.T., Winarti, E.R.(2018). Mathematical literacy ability of 9th grade students according to learning styles in Problem Based Learning-Realistic approach with Edmodo. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education, 7(1), 48-56.
Wijaya, A., Panhuizen, M.H., Doorman, M., & Robitzsch. (2014). Difficulties in Solving Context-based PISA Mathematics Task: An Analysis of Students’ Error. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 11(3), 555 – 584.
- Abstract viewed - 171 times
- PDF downloaded - 192 times
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright
© Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research, 2021
Affiliations
Emiliana Elsa Jerau
UNIVERSITAS NEGERI SEMARANG
Wardono Wardono
Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia
Nur Karomah Dwidayati
Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia
How to Cite
Mathematical Literacy Ability Viewed by Students’ Mathematical Habits of Mind Using Quick on the Draw Model With SPUR Approach
Vol 10 No 1 (2021): June 2021
Submitted: Jan 16, 2021
Published: Jun 30, 2021
Abstract
This study aims was describing students' mathematical literacy abilities based on mathematical habits of mind after being given Quick on the Draw learning with the SPUR approach. This research was a qualitative research. Subject of the research were students of class VII SMP Negeri 5 Borong.The results of the study show that (1) Quick on the Draw model with quality SPUR approach in improving students' mathematical literacy skills (2) Students with high mathematical habits of mind had excellent mathematical literacy skills, namely students were very capable of mastering the components of communication, mathematics, reasoning and argument, as well as formulating and solving problems. Students with mathematical habits of mind were showing good mathematical literacy skills. Students were able to master the components of communication, mathematics, and formulate and solve problems. Meanwhile, those that had not been mastering well are representation, reasoning and arguments, and the use of symbols, formal language, techniques, and operations. Students with low mathematical habits of mind show that literacy skills were still not good. Students only master the communication component well enough. Meanwhile, the other components had not been mastering properly.