Analisis Pedagogi Produktif Guru Matematika di SMA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30605/proximal.v8i2.6087Keywords:
Analysis, Certified Teachers, Uncertified Teachers, Productive Pedagogy, Teacher CompetenceAbstract
This study aims to analyze the productive pedagogies of mathematics teachers at SMA Negeri 2 Makassar, focusing on four key dimensions: intellectual quality, connectedness, recognition of difference, and a supportive classroom environment. Two teachers were selected through purposive sampling, one certified and one uncertified. Data was collected through observation, interviews, and questionnaires and analyzed using data condensation, data display, and conclusion drawing, with technique triangulation employed to ensure data validity. The findings indicate that both teachers demonstrated very high capabilities in the dimension of the supportive classroom environment. In the intellectual quality dimension, both were categorized as high. In the recognition of different dimensions, the certified teacher was in the very high category, while the uncertified teacher was classified as high. However, in the connectedness dimension, the accredited teacher demonstrated moderate capability, whereas the uncertified teacher was categorized as having high capability. These results suggest that both teachers implemented productive pedagogies, although their levels of achievement varied across different dimensions.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in Teaching and Teacher Education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.007
Bature, I. J., & Atweh, B. (2016). Achieving quality mathematics classroom instruction through productive pedagogies. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 2(1), 1–18.
Beane, J. A. (1997). Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education. Teachers College Press.
Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. ASCD.
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/effective-teacher-professional-development-report
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v8n1.2000
Drake, S. M., & Burns, R. C. (2004). Meeting standards through integrated curriculum. ASCD.
Djam’an, N. (2014). Application of the Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) approach with a focus on social justice in teaching and learning mathematics [Doctoral dissertation, Curtin University].
Djam’an, N., Bernard, B., Sahid, S., & Syukri, S. (2022). Analysis of productive pedagogies of pre-service teachers in teaching mathematics at school. Jurnal Didaktik Matematika, 9(2), 204–216.
Federici, R. A., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2014). Students’ perceptions of emotional and instrumental teacher support: Relations with motivational and emotional responses. International Education Studies, 7(1), 21–36.
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.
Harsa, F. S. (2017). Analisis keterampilan mengajar guru terhadap pembelajaran matematika di kelas X SMK. Jurnal Pelangi, 9(2), 79–80.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
Imran. (2010). Pembinaan guru di Indonesia. Pustaka Jaya.
Marzano, R. J. (2003). Classroom management that works: Research-based strategies for every teacher. ASCD.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Nurkholis, M. A., & Badawi, B. (2019). Profesionalisme guru di era revolusi industri 4.0. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Program Pascasarjana Universitas PGRI Palembang, 13(1), 104–116.
Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376–407. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311413609
Rahmah, N. (2013). Hakikat pendidikan matematika. Al-Khawarizmi: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam.
Rahmah, N., & Triana, S. (2023). Kendala-kendala implementasi kurikulum 2013 pada pembelajaran matematika di tingkat sekolah menengah atas. COMPETITIVE: Journal of Education, 2(1), 69–80.
Russeffendi, E. (1980). Pengajaran matematika modern untuk orang tua murid, guru, dan SPG. Tarsito.
Salsabila, S. A. (2023). Pengaruh model DAPIC problem solving process terhadap kemampuan berpikir komputasional matematis [Undergraduate thesis, FITK UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta].
Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 9–20. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1002
Suendarti, M., & Lestari, W. (2020). Kemampuan keterampilan dasar mengajar guru MIPA dalam pembelajaran kurikulum 2013. Titian Ilmu: Jurnal Ilmiah Multi Sciences, 12(2), 43–48.
Sugiyono. (2022). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.
Suparlan. (2008). Menjadi guru efektif. Hikayat Publishing.
Theodora, B. D. (2016). Pengaruh keterampilan mengajar guru terhadap hasil belajar siswa SMA se-Kota Malang yang dikontrol dengan variasi sumber belajar. Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 2(4).
Timperley, H. (2011). Realizing the power of professional learning. McGraw-Hill Education.
Bature, I. J., & Atweh, B. (2016). Achieving quality mathematics classroom instruction through productive pedagogies. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 2(1), 1–18.
Beane, J. A. (1997). Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education. Teachers College Press.
Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. ASCD.
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/effective-teacher-professional-development-report
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v8n1.2000
Drake, S. M., & Burns, R. C. (2004). Meeting standards through integrated curriculum. ASCD.
Djam’an, N. (2014). Application of the Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) approach with a focus on social justice in teaching and learning mathematics [Doctoral dissertation, Curtin University].
Djam’an, N., Bernard, B., Sahid, S., & Syukri, S. (2022). Analysis of productive pedagogies of pre-service teachers in teaching mathematics at school. Jurnal Didaktik Matematika, 9(2), 204–216.
Federici, R. A., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2014). Students’ perceptions of emotional and instrumental teacher support: Relations with motivational and emotional responses. International Education Studies, 7(1), 21–36.
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.
Harsa, F. S. (2017). Analisis keterampilan mengajar guru terhadap pembelajaran matematika di kelas X SMK. Jurnal Pelangi, 9(2), 79–80.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
Imran. (2010). Pembinaan guru di Indonesia. Pustaka Jaya.
Marzano, R. J. (2003). Classroom management that works: Research-based strategies for every teacher. ASCD.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Nurkholis, M. A., & Badawi, B. (2019). Profesionalisme guru di era revolusi industri 4.0. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Program Pascasarjana Universitas PGRI Palembang, 13(1), 104–116.
Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376–407. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311413609
Rahmah, N. (2013). Hakikat pendidikan matematika. Al-Khawarizmi: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam.
Rahmah, N., & Triana, S. (2023). Kendala-kendala implementasi kurikulum 2013 pada pembelajaran matematika di tingkat sekolah menengah atas. COMPETITIVE: Journal of Education, 2(1), 69–80.
Russeffendi, E. (1980). Pengajaran matematika modern untuk orang tua murid, guru, dan SPG. Tarsito.
Salsabila, S. A. (2023). Pengaruh model DAPIC problem solving process terhadap kemampuan berpikir komputasional matematis [Undergraduate thesis, FITK UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta].
Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 9–20. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1002
Suendarti, M., & Lestari, W. (2020). Kemampuan keterampilan dasar mengajar guru MIPA dalam pembelajaran kurikulum 2013. Titian Ilmu: Jurnal Ilmiah Multi Sciences, 12(2), 43–48.
Sugiyono. (2022). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.
Suparlan. (2008). Menjadi guru efektif. Hikayat Publishing.
Theodora, B. D. (2016). Pengaruh keterampilan mengajar guru terhadap hasil belajar siswa SMA se-Kota Malang yang dikontrol dengan variasi sumber belajar. Journal of Accounting and Business Education, 2(4).
Timperley, H. (2011). Realizing the power of professional learning. McGraw-Hill Education.
Downloads
Published
2025-06-03
How to Cite
Djam'an, N., Arsyad, N., & Rahmayani, R. (2025). Analisis Pedagogi Produktif Guru Matematika di SMA. Proximal: Jurnal Penelitian Matematika Dan Pendidikan Matematika, 8(2), 665–674. https://doi.org/10.30605/proximal.v8i2.6087
Issue
Section
Articles
License
In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:
- They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
- The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
- That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
- That its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
- They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
- They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.
License and Copyright Agreement
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
