IMPROVING OF STUDENTS MATHEMATICAL REASONING ABILITY BY APPLYING REALISTIC MATHEMATICS EDUCATION
(RME) ON APPROACH SUBJECT SETS IN VII GRADE SMP NEGERI 1 BINJAI ACADEMIC YEAR 2013/2014
By:
Rully Sulistiowati IDN 4103312007
Bilingual Mathematics Education Study Program
THESIS
Submitted to Fulfill the Requirement for Getting the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan
MATHEMATICS DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
IMPROVING OF STUDENTS MATHEMATICAL REASONING ABILITY BY APPLYING REALISTIC MATHEMATICS EDUCATION
(RME) ON APPROACH SUBJECT SETS IN VII GRADE SMP NEGERI 1 BINJAI ACADEMIC YEAR 2013/2014
Rully Sulistiowati (4103312007)
ABSTRACT
BIOGRAPHY
i
TABLE LIST
Page
Table 2.1 Four Types of Mathematics Education 11
Table 2.2.The Sum of Two Odd Numbers is an Even Number 15
Table 2.3. Test Result of first division in SMP 48
Table 3.1. Guidance of Student’s Average Score 63
Table 3.2. Increasing Criteria of Mathematical Reasoning 63
Table 4.1. Description of Teacher Observation Result in Cycle I 69
Table 4.2. Description of Student Observation Result in Cycle I 69
Table 4.3. Level of Student Reasoning in Reasoning Ability Test II 71
Table 4.4. Data of Mastery learning of Student in Reasoning Ability 72
Test II
Table 4.5. Level of Student Reasoning in Reasoning Ability Test II 74
Table 4.6. Data of Mastery learning of Student in Reasoning Ability 75
Test II
Table 4.7. The Result Obtained in the First Cycle 82
Table 4.8. Description of Teacher Observation Result in Cycle II 86
Table 4.9. Description of Student Observation Result in Cycle II 87
Table 4.10. Level of Student Reasoning in Reasoning Ability Test II 88
Table 4.11. Data of Mastery learning of Student in Reasoning Ability Test III 89
Table 4.12. Increasing Criteria of Reasoning Ability of Student 90
Table 4.13. Total Students Who Complete Reasoning Ability Test 91
ii
APPENDIX LIST
Page
Appendix 1 Lesson Plan 109
Appendix 2 The Diagnostic Test 136
Appendix 3 The Answer Key of DiagnosticTest 137
Appendix 4 Student Activity Sheet (SAS) I 139
Appendix 5 Student Activity Sheet (SAS) II 142
Appendix 6 The Answer Key of Student Activity Sheet (SAS) I 145
Appendix 7 The Answer Key of Student Activity Sheet (SAS) II 147
Appendix 8 The Blueprint of Reasoning Ability I 149
Appendix 9 The Reasoning Ability Test I 150
Appendix 10 The Key Answer of Reasoning Ability I 153
Appendix 11 The Assessment Rubric Of Reasoning Abilty Test I 155
Appendix 12 The Blueprint of Reasoning Ability II 156
Appendix 13 The Reasoning Ability Test II 157
Appendix 14 The Key Answer of Reasonijng Ability II 160
Appendix 15 The Assessment Rubric Of Reasoning Abilty Test II 162
Appendix 16 Validity of Reasoning Ability Test I 163
Appendix 17 Reability Table of Reasoning Ability Test I 165
Appendix 18 Validity of Reasoning Ability Test II 167
Appendix 19 Reability Table of Reasoning Ability Test II 169
Appendix 20 Observation Sheet of Teacher I 171
Appendix 21 Observation Sheet of Teacher II 173
Appendix 22 Observation Sheet of Student I 175
Appendix 23 Observation Sheet of Student II 177
Appendix 24 Analysis Teacher Observation Result Cycle I 179
Appendix 25 Analysis Teacher Observation Result Cycle II 180
Appendix 26 Analysis Student Observation Result Cycle I 181
iii
Appendix 28 Interview of Students 183
PREFACE
Give thank’s to Allah Subhanallahu Wata’ala give me more spirit to finish my thesis. The title of thesis is Improving of Student Mathematical Reasoning
Ability by Applying Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) on Approach
Subject Sets in VII Grade SMP Negeri 1 Binjai Academic Year 2014/2015. This
thesis was arranged to satisfy the law to get the Sarjana Pendidikan of
Mathematics and Science Faculty in State University of Medan.
For this chance I want to say thank you for the rector of State University
of Medan, Mr. Prof. Dr. Ibnu hajar, M.Si. and his staffs, Mr. Prof. Drs. Motlan,
M.Sc., Ph.D. for dean of FMIPA UNIMED and his college assistant of Dean I, II,
III in Unimed, Mr. Dr. Edy Surya, M.Si. as Leader of Mathematics Department,
Mr. Drs. Zul Amry, M.Si. as Leader of Mathematics Education Study Program
and then Mr. Drs. Yasifati Hia, M.Si. as secretary of Mathematics Department.
Big Thank’s for Mr. Prof. Dr. Hasratuddin, M.Pd. as supervisor who guide to prepare this thesis. And the thanks a lot for Mr. Prof. Dr. Mukhtar, M.Pd., Mr.
Prof. Dr. Edi Syahputra, M.Pd., and Mr. Mulyono, M.Si., who’re the persons
responsible for my thesis from the beginning until end. Thanks to Mr. Prof. Dr.
Sahat Saragih, M.Pd as my academic supervisor and then thank you so much for
all my lecturers and staffs in FMIPA.
Special thanks to my lovely father Mr. Gunawan, S.Pd., and my lovely
mother Mrs. Misliati for giving motivation, pray and all I need in finishing this
thesis. And then thanks to my beloved brother Muhammad Fachru Razi Harahap
for support me until the end of writer study.
And then, thank you so much for helping Mrs. Agustina, S.Pd, Mrs.
Hanidah Bangun, S.Pd, and student in grade VII-7 and all teachers and staffs in
Also thanks to big family in Bilingual Mathematics Education 2010 for
giving, taking, caring sadness and happiness in the class, Abdul, Anggi, Dian,
Dwi, Elfan, Erlyn, Falni, Kiki, Lia, Maria, Matyanne, Meiva, Melin, Mila, Nelly,
Petra, Riny, Siti, Surya, Sheila, Tika, Uli and Mimi. And also thanks to all partner
in PPLT Unimed 2013 in SMP Negeri 1 Tebing Tinggi who always gave support
and shared experience with writer.
Thanks a lot for my best Evridya Rizki, S.Pd, Dian Armadani Ritonga,
S.Pd and Elfan Syahputra, S.Pd. You are always beside me in all situation and
condition.
The writer should give a big effort to prepare this thesis, and the writer
knows that this thesis has so many weaknesses. So that, the writer needs some
suggestions to make it this be better. And big wishes, it can be improve our
knowledge.
Medan, October 2014 Writer,
FIGURE LIST
Page
Figure 1.1 The Students Answer from the Diagnostic test 4
Figure 2.1 Concept and applied mathematization 20
Figure 2.2 Levels of Model in RME 21
Figure 2.3 Reinvention model 21
Figure 2.4 Participants of the 2014 World Cup 32
Figure 2.5 Set A and Set B 33
Figure 2.6 Class VII SMP Panca Karya 33
Figure 2.7 Venn Diagram 34
Figure 2.8 Venn diagram, Set A, and Set B 34
Figure 2.9 Flow chart to determine two similarity sets 41
Figure 2.10 Venn digram A B 43
Figure 2.11 Venn DiagramCircumstancesLivestockCentreResidents 44
Figure 2.12 venn diagram AB 46
Figure 2.13 Venn Diagram of Set P 48
Figure 2.14 Venn Diagram of Set Q 49
Figure 2.15 Venn diagram of set A and set B 51
Figure 2.17 Venn diagram A – B 51
Figure 3.1 The main procedures of Classroom Action Research 57
Figure 4.1 Pie Chart Reasoning Ability Test I Level Percentage of Student in 72
Cycle I
Figure 4.2 Pie Chart of Percentage of Mastery Learning of Students in Cycle I 73
Figure 4.3 Pie Chart Reasoning Ability Test II Level Percentage of Student in 74
Cycle I
Figure 4.4 Pie Chart of Percentage of Mastery Learning of Students in Cycle I 75
Figure 4.3 Pie Chart Reasoning Ability Level Percentage of Student in Cycle II 88
Figure 4.5 Line Chart of Increasing Average of Class Score 90
CONTENTS
Page
Authentication sheet i
Biography ii
Abstract iii
Preface iv
Contents vi
Figure List ix
Table List xi
Appendix List xii
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Problem Background 1
1.2 Problem Identification 6
1.3 Problem Limitation 7
1.4 Problem Formulation 7
1.5 Research Objectives 7
1.6 The Benefit of Research 8
1.7 Operational Definiton 8
CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Theoretical Framework 9
2.1.1 The Essence of Learning 9
2.1.2 Mathematics Lerning 10
2.1.3.Mathematical Reasoning Ability 12
2.1.4. Reasoning Ability in Mathematics Learning 17
2.1.5 Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) 17
2.1.5.1 The Characteristic of Realistic Mathematics Education 19
2.1.5.2 The Principle of Realistic Mathematics Education 22
2.1.5.4 The Benefit and The Weakness of Realistic Education 25
Implementation
2.1.5.5 Design of Realistic Mathematics Education Lesson 26
2.1.5.6 The Relationship between Realistic 29
Mathematics Education with the Improvement of
Reasoning Ability
2.1.5.7 The effectiveness of realistic mathematic 30
approach in increasing students
2.1.6 The Lesson of Sets Matter 31
2.1.6.1 Understanding the concept of sets and venn diagram 31
2.1.6.2 Understanding Set Relation 33
2.1.6.3 Understanding Set Operation 42
2.2 Review of Relevant Research 52
2.3 Conceptual Framework 52
2.4.Action Hypothesis 53
CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 The Type of Research 54
3.2 Location and Time Research 54
3.3 Subject and Research Object 54
3.3.1 Research Subject 54
3.3.2 Research Object 54
3.4 Research Design 55
3.4.1 Research Procedure 55
3.5 The Instrument of Data Collection 58
3.5.1 The Instrument of Student 58
Mathematical Reasoning Ability
3.5.2 Observation Sheet 59
3.5.3 Interview Test 60
3.6 Technique of Data Analysis 60
3.6.2 Data Explanation 60
3.7 Performance Indicator 63
CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Description of Research Result 65
4.1.1 Result Description of Cycle I Research 65
4.1.1.1 Problem I 65
4.1.1.2 Action Planning Stage 65
4.1.1.3 Action Implementation I 66
4.1.1.4 Data Analysis I 68
4.1.1.5 Interview I 68
4.1.1.6 Data Analysis II 73
4.1.2 Description of Research Result in Cycle II 82
4.1.2.1 Problem II 82
4.1.2.2 Action Planning Stage II 83
4.1.2.3 Action Implementation II 83
4.1.2.4 Data Analysis II 86
4.1.2.5 Interview 92
4.1.2.6 Reflection II 92
4.2. Research Result Discussion 98
4.2.1 Learning Factors 98
4.2.2 Mathematics Reasoning Ability 100
4.3 Research Findings 102
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1 Conclusion 103
5.2 Suggestion 105
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1 Problem Background
Education is a conscious and deliberate effort to create an atmosphere of
learning and the learning process so that learners are actively developing the
potential for him to have the spiritual strength of religious, self-control,
personality, intelligence, noble character, and the skills needed themselves and
society. In the era of globalization increasingly advanced and complex, a person
required to master science and technology. Knowledge can be acquired through
education, namely formal and informal education. Mathematics is the basic
science that has an important role in science and technology. The role of
mathematics and mathematics education in the common goal of preparing
students to be able to face changes in circumstances that are developed through
critical action research base, rational and careful, and could use a good mind set in
learning mathematics and science in everyday life.
Otherwise, approach in mathematics is influenced by the views of teachers
towards students in learning mathematics and mathematics Adams & Hamm,
2010 in (Wijaya : 5). Adams and Hamm mentions four different views on the
position and role of mathematics, namely: (1) Mathematics as a way of thinking;
(2) Mathematics as an understanding of patterns and relationship; (3) Mathematics
as a tool: (4) Mathematics as a language or communication tools. In addition
influenced by the teacher's views about the position and role of mathematics,
mathematics learning direction is also influenced by the goal of mathematics
education.
In fact, Indonesia in leraning mathematics still has many problems such as
students' mathematics learning outcomes are still low. Based on the research
results of the Third International Mathematics And Science Study Repeat
(TIMSS-R) in 2011 stated that among in the 46 countries, Indonesian junior high
position and role of mathematics, since mathematics is the basic of science but
nowadays mathematic has not turned out to be a favorite subject.
In addition students are less, students still regard mathematics as a subject
that is difficult. Confusing and even feared by most students. Why it can be said
like that? It because the use of traditional method such as conventional learning
method not make student as learning subject. They do not want to create new
learning context that different from the previous as using multimedia base of
interactive learning. From this, it should be removed paradigm students about
mathematic is so difficult. And to find solutions to help the student in solving
mathematical problems by improving teaching methods and themselves. Whereas,
based on the the appendix Minister of National Education (Permendiknas) No. 20
of 2006 concerning content standards (Wijaya, 2012: 16) says that the purpose of
learning mathematics as follows: (1)Understand the mathematical concepts,
explains the relationship between concepts and apply concepts or algorithms,
flexibly, accurately, efficiently, and appropriately, in solving the problem; (2)Use
the pattern and nature of reasoning, mathematical manipulation in making
generalizations, compile evidence, or explain mathematical ideas and statements;
(3)Solve the problems that include the ability to understand the problem, devised
a mathematical model, solve the model and interpret the obtained solution;
(4)Communicate the ideas with symbols, tables, diagrams, or other media to
clarify the situation or problem; (5)Have respect for the usefulness of mathematics
in life, which is curious, attention, and interest in studying mathematics, as well as
a tenacious attitude and confidence in solving problems.
Based on the objective of mathematics learning, can be said that learning
mathematic not only enough be able to computation mathematic, but should be
mathematics learning become meaningful learning where students can use his
ability and curiousity indepedently, and not look mathematics as an abstract thing.
Mathematics should be able to imagined by student, so that student can
understand mathematics concept very well. Moreover, mathematics education in
Indonesia has seen the development of mathematical thinking skills, especially the
developing minds of some facts or principles, and the results of the mental
processes of knowledge or conclusions.
Mathematics and mathematical reasoning are two things that can not be
separated, mathematics is understood through reasoning, and reasoning to
understand and put into practice in the learning of mathematics, so that
mathematical reasoning ability is very important and needed in the study of
mathematics. According to (Suryanto : 37)
“Pendidikan Matematika Realistik (RME) adalah pendidikan matematika
sebagai hasil dari adaptasi Pendidikan Matematika Realistik yang telah diselaraskan dengan kondisi budaya, geografi, dan kehidupan sosial Indonesia.”
In application PMRI very concerned that the study of mathematics is an
abstract object, a thing that cannot be compromised, but also noticed that the
mental development of children requires a step to bring the children learn the
abstract object.
From interviews with Mrs. Agustina, S.Pd as mathematics teacher at SMP
Negeri 1 Binjai which states that :
Students are still difficulties in solving mathematical problems, which have an impact on learning outcomes and value of diagnostic student who does not complete. This is due to the lack of reasoning power of students to problem-solving. And the implementation of learning mathematics often use the lecture method is centered on teachers (teacher centered), this affects the students are passive in learning mathematics.
Based on survey research conducted on January 30th 2014 which showed low. reasoning ability can be seen from the results of the students' graduation of
Formative Test reached 20% of the total number of students, while 80% of
students do not achieve a passing grade. This can be seen in the responses of the
students from one of the diagnostic test about the average student can not answer
the question correctly. One of the “Ratio and Proportion” given problem is as
follows, “a contractor estimates that he can have a work completed in 40 days by
employing 48 workers. After 10 days, the work is paused for 6 days. How many
Figure 1.1 The Students Answer from One of Item Formative Test
By looking at the students‟ answers about the one item from the Formative
Test, we can conclude that the reasoning ability of students is still low, it is
supported by students answer that question without understanding the concept of
using inverse proportions is accompanied by mathematical manipulation by
understanding the contexrual question, while the students' answers in the question
they are still confused to understand how to solve the problem and get the result.
The function of reasoning ability test is to evaluate whether the statement can be
believed or embraced. Or again literally, we see no reason (reason) behind a
statement. And for students, the function reasoning ability test is to evaluate how
far ability students to solve problem by reasoning. Can see from the formative test
have done, some students doesn‟t undertand the concept to solve the problem.
The Efforts should be made to improve the students lack of mathematical
reasoning ability is the improvement of the learning activities. It is time to change
learning math teacher-centered to student-centered change. Knowledge is not
something ready-made, but a process that must be cultivated, conceived and
constructed by the students, and can not be transferred to those who simply accept
passively. Thus, students must be active themselves. While the teachers should act
as a facilitator and mediator who creatively so that students can learn in a pleasant
atmosphere. Learning paradigm is connected to the theory of Realistic
Mathematics Education (RME), which in Indonesian means Realistic
Sets is one of subjects in the Junior Grade VII. This material is the
contextual and it‟s close to daily life. However, this material is often difficult due
to the lack of ability to solve the problem. The weakness is caused due to the
mathematics students are often taught in a very abstract concept while in
elementary school. Lack of trained students how to solve problems in daily life.
By applying the Realistic Mathematics Education in teaching of arithmatic social
is a right thing, which is oriented approach to learn mathematics in everyday
experience of mathematics (mathematize of everyday experience) and apply
mathematics in daily life so that students are expected to build their own
knowledge gained and try to use logic to think or reason in constructing
knowledge.
Statement of Freudenthal in Wijaya (2012: 20) argues that "Mathematics
is a form of human activity that underlies the development of Realistic
Mathematics Education Approach (RME)." Realistic Mathematics Education is an
approach to teaching mathematics in the Netherlands. The word "realistic" is often
misunderstood as a "real-word", which is the real world. Many people who think
that the Realistic Mathematics Education is an approach to learning mathematics
using everyday problems. The use of the word "realistic" is actually derived from
the Dutch "Zich realiseren" which means "to imagine" or "to imagine" (Van den
Heuvel-Panhuizen, 1998). According to Van den Heuvel Panhuizen, the use of the
word "realistic" is not merely indicate the existence of a connection with the real
world (real word) but rather refers to the focus of Realistic Mathematics
Education in placing emphasis on the use of a situation that could be imagined
(imaginable) by students. This is supported by Treffers and Beishuizen (1999) in
(Hough and Gough : 1) that :
„RME involves a complete reversal of the teaching/learning process‟. The
Based on the above quote Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) on
approach is not only used to illustrate the application and the reality in the real
world, but as a resource for learning mathematics itself. Given the context of the
real world that is already known by the students. The most important thing that is
real enough for students to be able to engage with them so that they can solve the
problem that makes sense. So from the above statement implies that the RME is a
learning does not start from the definitions, theorems, or the properties and then
followed by examples, as it has been implemented in various schools. However,
the properties, definitions and theorems that are expected as though it was
rediscovered by the students through the completion of a given contextual
teachers in early learning. In other words the RME on approach students are
encouraged or challenged to actively work, even expected to construct or build
their own knowledge gained and try to use logic to think or reason in constructing
knowledge.
Based on description of the background, then writer interest to do a
research with title“Improving of Student Mathematical Reasoning Ability by Applying Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) on Approach Subject Sets in VII Grade SMP Negeri 1 Binjai Academic Year 2013/2014.
1.2Problem Identification
From the description ofthe background obtained by the identification of
problems, namely:
1. Students reasoning ability is low
2. Learning methods are often used is still centered on the teacher
3. Mathematic knowledge is not built from meaningful life context and
relevant to student so that students cannot construct his formal skill to
be formal skill.
4. Realistic Mathematics Education approach is not yet implied students'
1.3Problem Limitation
As described above, there are many problems that are identified, there
needs to be more focus on problem restrictions. In this study the problems that
arise bounded on Improvement of Mathematical Reasoning Ability Students By
Applying Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) on approach Subject Sets in
VII grade SMP Negeri 1 Binjai Academic Year 2014/2015.
1.4Problem Formulation
Based on the background that have described above. The problem in this
research is formulated as follows :
1. How is the improvement of students reasoning ability who studied
by realistic mathematics approach at SMP Negeri 1 Binjai on the
subject sets ?
2. How to effectiveness of realistic mathematics approach to increase
students at SMP Negeri 1 Binjai on the subject sets ?
3. How to Implementation realistic mathematics approach so that be
able to improve of students mathematical reasoning ability at SMP
Negeri 1 Binjai on the subject sets ?
1.5Research Objective
Based on the problem formulation above, the pupose of this research are :
1. To know the improvement of students mathematical reasoning ability
who studied by realistic mathematic approach.
2. To know the effectiveness of realistic mathematic approach in
increasing students.
3. To know implement realistic mathematics approach so that be able to
1.6Benefits of Research 1. For Students
a. It is expected students by implement realistic mathematics learning can
improve student‟s reasoning mathematical abilities.
b. It can raise motivation and interest of students in mathematic.
2 For teachers, It is expected to be input in the use of the approach
varied in the pursuit of learning in the classroom and can relevant appeal
study for society in the next day.
3 For schools, it is expected to be used as input in their policy innovations
related learning in schools to improve the quality of teaching mathematics.
4 For the authors, this study is expected to be a positive feedback in
preparing themselves as prospective educators.
5 For other researchers, the study is expected be medium for applying the
approach of realistics in learning process.
1.7 Operational Definition
To avoid the happening of the different interpretation to the terms that
used in this research, therefore need to presented operational defenition as
follows :
1. Mathematical resoning ability that mean in this research is : 1) propose
conjecture; 2) doing mathematic manipulation; 3)giving explanation and
fact characteristic, relation, or pattern that exist; 4) collect conclusion; 5)
the ability of solving mathematics problem by following logic arguments.
2. Realistic mathematics education is an approach in mathematics learning
that many benefitted imaginable situation. Realistic approach based on
five characteristics, they are : 1) phenomenological exploration or the use
of context; 2) the use of models for progressive mathematicalization; 3)
the use of students own production and construction; 4) interactivity; 5)
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 5.1. Conclusion
According to all classroom action research implementation, include
learning process, analysis result, and observation result can be concluded that as
follow :
1. The Improvement of mathematic learning by using realistic mathematic education can improve students’ mathematic reasoning. It is given by average score of mathematic reasoning in reasoning mathematic test, in
cycle I is 67,90 get improved to be 75,16. the improvement of average
score from cycle I to cycle II is 0,14 categorized into low category.
2. From implementation of cycle I from 36 students there are 23 (64%)
students achieved the mastery learning and 13 (36%) students are not yet
achieved the mastery learning. In cycle II, from 36 students, there are 32
(89%) students achieved the mastery learning and 4 (11%) students are not
yet achieved the mastery learning, classically mastery learning in cycle II
is 89%.
3. Based on learning process which are implemented in this research and
observation result, mathematic learning process by using realistic
mathematic education, as we know that realistic mathematics education is
an approach of learning. Firstly, teacher give contextual problem and
divided students in a group at the learning process . We can see from the syntax of realistic mathematic education. In opening activity’s teacher give greetings and some information to students about the matter will be learned. Students answering greeting’s teacher and listening some information from the teacher. Then, in core activity’s there are five phase
must through by students. The five phase are observing (orientation of
students on problem), questioning (organizing students to learn),
(Developing and presenting the work), and networking (Analyze and
evaluate the problem-solving process). So in every phase use problem to develop students thinking and creativity. After that, closing activity’s. in this part teacher an students do reflection from the learning, teacher give
homework to students, and teacher give information about next topic to
students. In realistic mathematics education has reinvention after learning
process. Mathematic learning process by realistic mathematic education
get the score is 3,62 which categorized into very good category.
Implementation of learning by using realistic mathematics education
approach is done by done contextual problem. After give the contextual
problems, teacher gives students any moment to understand the problem.
After that, teacher guides students to make description based on problem
which are happened in their life and then students find the solution by their
own way. If students learn in group, teacher also gives any moment to
compare and discuss together and decide the best answer. Then, make any
conclusions to create mathematic concept. in the end, students get intented
5.2. Suggestion
According to the conclusions and imolementations of the research, there
are some suggestion to get the attentention of all parties on the use of realistic
mathematic approach in the process of learning mathematics. The suggestions are
as follow :
1. This research shows that the learning based approach to realistic mathematics
education: (1) Improving mathematical reasoning ability, (2) make students
were active in learning. Because in using mathematic realistic education
approach potential to be applied in mathematics learning.
2. In reaslistic mathematics education approach, the teacher acts as a moderator
and facilitator. Therefore, mathematics teacher who will implement realistic
mathematics education approach should consider the following matters :
(a)the availability of teaching materials in the form of contextual issues as
serve as informal mathematics (model for) inj the learning process, (b) the
consideration required for teachers in intervention so that students attempt to
achieve more optimal the actual progress, (c) realistic mathematic approach
should be applied to the material that is essential regarding real objects
around the place of learning, so that students more quickly understand the lesson being learned, (d) need consider students’ knowledge of the issues presented.
3. In every meeting the teacher should create the life discussion for students.
Because students can express their mathematical ideas in their own language and manner, so that the students’ more brave to get out their argues, more confident and creative
4. In realistic mathematics education approach, the success students in learning
process is not enough from written test but required an evaluation tool that is
able to evaluate all their activities in the learning process. For instance, as like
students activity in asking-answer question individually and grouply and
REFFERENCES
Adinawan, Cholik and Sugijono, 2009, Math for Junior High School English Edition, Jakarta, Erlangga
Armanto, Dian, (2002), Teaching Multiplication and Division Realistically In Indonesia Primary Schools : A Prototype of Local Instructional Theory. Den Haag : Egevens Koninklijke Bibliotheek.
Daryanto, (2007), Evaluasi Pendidikan, Penerbit Rineka Cipta, Jakarta.
Djamarah, Syaiful Bahri., (2011), Psikologi Belajar, Penerbit Rineka Cipta, Jakarta
Fakultas Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam Universitas Negeri Medan, (2010), Buku Pedoman Penulisan Skripsi dan Proposal Penelitian Pendidikan, FMIPA Unimed, Medan.
Fitriyani, M., (2013), Improvement of Student Mathematical Reasoning Ability in VII Garde SMP Negeri 1 Medan by Applying Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) on the Subject of Fraction Academic Year 2012 / 2013,Skripsi, FMIPA, UNIMED, MEDAN.
Godino, D. Juan, (1996), Mathematical Concepts, Their Meanings, and Understanding, Spain : University of Granada
Hough, Sue and Gough, Steve., (2007), Realistic Mathematic Education, Mathematics Teaching 203 : 34 – 38
Available in
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sch&AN=266583 17&site=src-live (Accessed February 24th2014)
Iskandar., (2012), Penelitian Tindakan Kelas, REFERENSI (GP Press Group), Jakarta
Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia., (2013), Matematika Kurikulum 2013 Kelas VII SMP. Jakarta : Politeknik Negeri Media Kreatif
Ling, Jonathan and Catling, Jonathan.,(2012), Psikologi kognitif, Erlangga, Jakarta
Yoyakarta : Innovative Journal of Curriculum and Educational Technology.
Mayer, R. E, (1992), Cognition and instruction:O n their historic meeting within
educational psychology. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 405-412
Available in
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructional_theory (Accessed Desember 14th 2014)
National Council of Teacher of Mathematics.,(2003),NCTM Program Standards, Available in
http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2011/international-results-mathematics.html (Accessed February 25th 2014)
National Council of Teacher of Mathematics., (2000), Principles and Standards for School Mathematics,Reston Va : National Council of Teacher of Mathematics
Panhuizen-Heuvel, Den Van Marja, (2003), The Didactical Use Of Models In Realistic Mathematics Education: An Example From A Longitudinal Trajectory On Percentage1, Kluwer Academic Publishers 54 : 9-35
Sagala, S., (2009), Konsep dan Makna Pembelajaran, Alfabeta, Bandung.
Sagor, Richard., (2005), The Action Research Guidebook, Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Sa’adah, W . 2010. Peningkatan Kemampuan Penalaran Matematis Siswa
Kelas VIII SMP Negeri 3 Banguntapan dalam Pembelajaran Matematika
melalui Pendekatan Pendekatan Matematika Realistik Indonesia (PMRI).
Skripsi. FMIPA. UNY. Yogyakarta.
http://eprints.uny.ac.id/2273/1/SKRIPSI_WIDAYANTI__NURMA_SA%
27ADAH.pdf (Accessed January 18th 2013)
Suryanto, dkk., (2010), Sejarah Pendidikan Matematika Realistik Indonesia (PMRI), Dikti, Jakarta.
Sutikno, Sobry M., (2013), Belajar dan Pembelajaran, Pustaka Bumi, Bandung
Stiff, V. Lee, (1999), Developing Mathematical Reasoning in Grades K-12, Reston Va : National Council of Teacher of Mathematics.
Tandililing,Edy, (2012), Implementasi Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) DI Sekolah, Jurnal Guru Membangun : 2
Turmudi., (2009), Landasan Filsafat dan Teori Pembelajaran Matematika, Leuser Cita Pustaka, Jakarta.
Trianto., (2009), Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif, Prenada Media, Surabaya.
Wardhani, Sri., (2008), Analisis SI dan SKL Mata Pelajaran Matematika SMP/MTs untuk Optimalisasi Tujuan Mata Pelajaran Matematika, Pusat Pengembangan Dan Pemberdayaan Pendidik Dan Tenaga Kependidikan Matematika Tahun 2008, Yogyakarta.
Wijaya, A., (2012), Pendidikan Matematika Realistik; Suatu Alternatif Pendekatan Pembelajaran Matematika, Graha Ilmu, Yogyakarta.
Widjaja, B. Yenni and Heck Andre, (2003), How a Realistic Mathematics Education Approach and Microcomputer-Based Laboratory Worked in Lessons on Graphing at an Indonesian Junior High School, AMSTEL Institute, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Available in :
www.science.uva.nl/~heck/.../art/JSMESA.pdf (Accessed Desember 15th 2014)
Yudhanegara, Ridwan, Mokhammad., (2012), Penalaran Matematika. Available in
http://mridwanyudhanegara.blogspot.com/2012/04/penalaran-matematika.html (Accessed January 29th 2014)
