Asmara, A. B. W. 2019. Profil Intuisi Matematis Siswa dalam Pemecahan Masalah Matematika Ditinjau dari Gaya Kognitif Field Independent dan Field Dependent. Kontinu : Jurnal Penelitian Didaktik Matematika. 3(1), 37–50.
Azhari, & Somakim. 2013. Peningkatan Kemampuan Berpikir Kreatif Matematik Siswa Melalui Pendekatan Konstruktivisme di Kelas VII Sekolah Menengah Pertama (SMP) Negeri 2 Banyuasin III. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika. 7(2), 1-12.
Bada & Olusegun, S. 2015. Constructivism Learning Theory: A Paradigm for Teaching and Learning. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education (IOSR-JRME). 5(6), 66-70.
Baiduri, B. 2015. Gaya Kognitif dan Hasil Belajar Matematika Siswa Field Dependent-Independent. Aksioma: Jurnal Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika. 6(1), 1-9.
Basir, M. A. 2015. Kemampuan Penalaran Siswa dalam Pemecahan Masalah Matematis Ditinjau Dari Gaya Kognitif. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika FKIP Unissula. 3(1), 106–114.
Ilmadi, Herlina, E., & Zarista, R. H. 2021. Penerapan Model Treffinger di Masa Pandemi Covid-19 dalam Rangka Melatih Kemampuan Berfikir Kreatif Mahasiswa. Jurnal Karya Pendidikan Matematika. 8(1), 32-39.
Isaksen, S.G., Dorval, K.B., & Treffinger, D.J. 2011. Creative Approaches to Problem Solving: AFramework for Innovation and Change, 3rd Edition, SAGE Publications.
Isnaini, Duskri, M., & Said, M. 2016. Upaya Meningkatkan Kreativitas dan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika Siswa Sekolah Menengah Pertama melalui Model Pembelajaran Treffinger. Jurnal Didaktik Matematika. 3(1), 15-25.
Kadir, Lucyana, & Satriawati, G. 2017. The Implementation of Open-Inquiry Approach to Improve Students’ Learning Activities, Responses, and Mathematical Creative Thinking Skills. Journal on Mathematics Education. 8(1), 103-114.
Konita, M., Sugiarto, & Rochmad. 2017. Analisis Kemampuan Siswa pada Aspek Berpikir Kreatif Ditinjau dari Gaya Kognitif dalam Pembelajaran Matematika dengan Model CORE Menggunakan Pendekatan Konstruktivisme. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education. 6(1), 63-70.
Lestari, S., Waluya, B., & Suyitno, H. 2015. Analisis Kemampuan Keruangan dan Self Efficacy Peserta Didik dalam Model Pembelajaran Treffinger Berbasis Budaya Demak. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research. 4(2), 108-114.
Marlissa, I., & Widjajanti, D. B. 2015. Pengaruh Strategi React Ditinjau dari Gaya Kognitif Terhadap Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah, Prestasi Belajar dan Apresiasi Siswa Terhadap Matematika. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika. 2 (2), 186-189.
Napfiah, S. 2018. Analisis Tingkat Kemampuan Berpikir Kreatif dalam Pemecahan Masalah Matematika Ditinjau dari Gaya Kognitif. JP2M: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Matematika. 4(1), 80-91.
Oktavia, I., A., & Masriyah. 2017. Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Treffinger pada Materi Bangun Ruang Sisi Datar. MATHEdunesa. 6(1), 121-128.
Purnomo, R., C., Sunardi, & Sugiarti, T. 2017. Profil Kreativitas dalam Pemecahan Masalah Matematika Ditinjau dari Gaya Kognitif Field Independent (FI) dan Field Dependent (FD). Jurnal Edukasi. 4(2), 9-14.
Rochmad, Agoestanto, A., & Kharis, M. 2018. Characteristic of Critical and Creative Thinking of Students Mathematics Education Study Program. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 983(1), 1-4.
Silva, I. P., Purnomo, D., & Zuhri, M. S. 2019. Efektivitas Pendekatan Konstruktivisme Berbantu Media E-Book Berbasis Android terhadap Hasil Belajar Ditinjau dari Gaya Belajar pada Siswa Kelas X di SMKN 11 Semarang. Imajiner. 1(6), 310-316.
Singh, S., & Yaduvanshi, S. 2015. Constructivism in Science Classroom: Why and How. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications. 5(3), 1-5.
Sudjana, N. 2009. Penilain Hasil Proses Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya.
Sugiyono. 2013. Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan Kombinasi (Mixed Methods). Bandung: Alfabeta
Sultan, W. H., Woods, P. C., & Koo, A.-C. 2011. A Constructivist Approach for Digital Learning: Malaysian Schools Case Study. Educational Technology and Society. 14 (4), 149–163.
Triwibowo, Z., Dwidayati, N.K., & Sugiman. 2017. Analisis Kemampuan Berpikir Kreatif Matematis Ditinjau dari Gaya Belajar Siswa Kelas VII Melalui Model Pembelajaran Treffinger dengan Pendekatan Open-Ended. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education. 6 (3), 391-399.
Zakiah, N. E. 2020. Level kemampuan metakognitif siswa dalam pembelajaran matematika berdasarkan gaya kognitif. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika. 7(2). 132 –147.
- Abstract viewed - 46 times
- PDF downloaded - 29 times
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright
© Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research, 2022
Affiliations
Maula Amalia Maghfuroh
Pascasarjana Universitas Negeri Semarang
Rochmad Rochmad
Universitas Negeri Semarang
Dwijanto Dwijanto
Universitas Negeri Semarang
How to Cite
Students’ Mathematical Creative Thinking Skills based on Cognitive Style in Treffinger Learning with a Constructivism Approach
Vol 11 No 2 (2022): December 2022
Submitted: May 17, 2022
Published: Dec 30, 2022
Abstract
This study aims to describe students' mathematical creative thinking skills based on cognitive style in Treffinger learning with a constructivism approach. The research method used was qualitative research method with descriptive approach. The subjects in this study were students of class VIII A of SMP IT Insan Cendekia in Semarang city. The subjects were selected by 3 students each based on cognitive style type field independent (FI) and cognitive style type field dependent (FD). Data collection techniques used the Group Embedded Figure Test (GEFT), interview guidelines, and observation. The results of this study indicate that students' mathematical creative thinking skills with a cognitive style type field independent (FI) has been able to meet the indicators of fluency, originality and elaboration are good, while the indicators of flexibility are quite good. In terms of students’ mathematical creative thinking skills with a cognitive style type field dependent (FD) has been able to meet the indicators of fluency are good, the indicators of originality and elaboration are quite good, while the indicators of flexibility are less good.