Main Article Content


Student interest in learning is a very important factor in determining student success in learning mathematics. Various attempts were made by educators and educational researchers to increase student interest in learning. This research is a classroom action research model by Kemmis and Mc Taggart that aims to describe the application of Guided Discovery learning in optimizing students' interest in learning mathematics. The increase in students' interest in learning mathematics is also supported by the results of student achievement. The research data consisted of students' interest in learning mathematics, learning achievement data, and observations of learning outcomes. Data on learning interest in mathematics is obtained through a questionnaire, data on learning achievement is obtained through tests and data on the results of observations of learning achievement are obtained through observation sheets during learning. In general, the results of the study showed that the average student interest in learning mathematics at 83.93 reached the good category. The completeness of student achievement test results reached 83.87% of students achieving the minimum completeness criteria with an average student score of 85.61. The percentage of teacher and student learning outcomes respectively at 83.80% and 76.91% reached the good category. Therefore it can be concluded that the Guided Discovery learning model can be applied to optimize students' interest in mathematics learning especially by paying attention to the results of reflections from this study.


Guided Discovery Learning Learning Interest Mathematics Education

Article Details


  1. Agustyarini, Y., & Jailani, J. (2015). Pengembangan bahan ajar matematika dengan pendekatan kontekstual dan metode penemuan terbimbing untuk meningkatkan eq dan sq siswa smp akselerasi. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 2(1), 135–147.
  2. Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1–18.
  3. Arends, R. I. (2012). Learning to teach (Ninth Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  4. Astutik, H. S. (2017). Keefektifan pembelajaran berdasarkan masalah pada bangun ruang sisi datar ditinjau dari penguasaan sk, motivasi, dan minat siswa SMP. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 4(1), 56–66.
  5. Habig, S., Blankenburg, J., Vorst, H. V., Fechner, S., Parchmann, I & Sumfleth, E. (2018). Context characteristics and their effects on students’ situational interest in chemistry. International Journal of Science Education. Retrieved from
  6. Henriksen, E. K., Dillon, J., & Ryder, J. (2015). Understanding student participation and choice in science and technology education. (E. K. Henriksen, J. Ryder, & J. Dillon, Eds.). London: Springer.
  7. Herzog, M., Ehlert, A., & Fritz, A. (2019). Development of a sustainable place value understanding. In International Handbook of Mathematical Learning Difficulties, 561-579.
  8. Khasnis, B. Y., & Aithal, M. (2011). Guided discovery method: a remedial measure in mathematics. International Reffered Research Journal, 2(22), 21–22.
  9. Khomsiatun, S., & Retnawati, H. (2015). Pengembangan perangkat pembelajaran dengan penemuan terbimbing untuk meningkatkan kemampuan pemecahan masalah. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 2(1), 92–106.
  10. Kirschner, P., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86.
  11. Krapp, A., & Prenzel, M. (2011). Research on interest in science: Theories, methods, and findings. International Journal of Science Education, 33(1), 27–50. Retrieved from
  12. Mulyana, S., Rusdi, R., & Vivanti, D. (2018). The Effect of Guided Inquiry Learning Model and Scientific Performance on Student Learning Outcomes. Indonesian Journal of Science and Education, 2(1), 105–109.
  13. Mumba, F., Mbewe, S., & Chabalengula, V. M. (2015). Elementary school teachers’ familiarity, conceptual knowledge, and interest in light. International Journal of Science Education, 37(2), 185–209.
  14. NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. United States of America: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  15. Nitko, A. J., & Brookhart, S. M. (2011). Educational assessment of students. Pearson. Retrieved from
  16. Paszkowska-rogacz, A., & Yıldız, D. A. (2015). Career counselling involving work with parents. Training book for career counsellors. Łódź, Poland: FAMICO.
  17. Rautiainen, M., Mäensivu, M., & Nikkola, T. (2018). Becoming interested during teacher education. European Journal of Teacher Education, 41(4), 418–432.
  18. Sanjaya, W. (2008). Strategi pembelajaran berorientasi standar proses pendidikan. Jakarta: kencana prenada media group.
  19. Tran, T., Nguyen, N. G., Bui, M. D., & Phan, A. H. (2014). Discovery learning with the help of the geogebra dynamic geometry software. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 7(1), 44–57.
  20. Vulperhorst, J. P., Wessels, K. R., Bakker, A., & Akkerman, S. F. (2018). How do STEM-interested students pursue multiple interests in their higher educational choice? International Journal of Science Education, 40(8), 828–846.
  21. Wibowo, A. (2017). Pengaruh pendekatan pembelajaran matematika realistik dan saintifik terhadap prestasi belajar, kemampuan penalaran matematis dan minat belajar. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 4(1), 1–10.