Main Article Content


Society’s openness to science, technology, and information development cannot be stopped. To face the development of technology and information, we must be intelligent in assessing, accommodating, and filtering the development of technology and information so that we can survive in constantly changing, uncertain, and competitive conditions. Besides intelligence, the character is also important to face the development of science, technology, and information. Individuals who have good character will be wiser in utilizing the development of science, technology, and information. Therefore, in this analytical research paper, we introduce SIMPATIK learning to increase the effectiveness of learning mathematics at school. Through SIMPATIK learning, students can do mathematics intelligently and have good character. SIMPATIK learning can be defined as learning that can develop sociocultural, innovative, independent, caring, creative, and active abilities in mathematics learning based on information, communication, and technology. We believe that SIMPATIK Learning can increase the quality of mathematics learning and can be used by teachers to develop the intelligence and character of students. SIMPATIK Learning is also expected to contribute science to knowledge in mathematics education worldwide.


Character Education ICT Intelligence Mathematics SIMPATIK Learning

Article Details


  1. Bormanaki, H. B., & Khoshhal, Y. (2017). The role of equilibration in Piaget’s theory of cognitive development and its implication for receptive skills: A theoretical study. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 8(5), 996-1005.

  2. Brookfield, S. (1981). Independent adult learning. Studies in Adult Education, 13(1), 15-27.

  3. Brown, M. (2008). The innovative leader: How to inspire your team and drive creativity. Library Review, 57(5), 406-408.

  4. Carnoy, M. (2016). Educational policies in the face of globalization. In K. Mundy, A. Green, B. Lingard, & A. Verger (Eds.), The Handbook of Global Education Policy (pp. 27-42).

  5. Clark, R. C., Mayer, R. E., & Thalheimer, W. (2003). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. Performance Improvement, 42(5), 41-43.

  6. Cooper, B. (2004). Empathy, interaction and caring: Teachers' roles in a constrained environment. Pastoral Care in Education, 22(3), 12-21.

  7. Ellington, H., Percival, F., & Race, P. (1993). Handbook of educational technology. Kogan Page. London: Kogan Page.

  8. Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3-21).

  9. Graham, C. R. (2013). Emerging practice and research in blended learning. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 351-368). New York: Routledge.

  10. Hausfather, S. J. (1996). Vygotsky and schooling: Creating a social context for learning. Action in Teacher Education, 18(2), 1-10.

  11. Hiemstra, R. (1994). Self-Directed Learning. Massachusetts: HRD Press.

  12. Hoic-Bozic, N., Mornar, V., & Boticki, I. (2008). A blended learning approach to course design and implementation. IEEE transactions on education, 52(1), 19-30.

  13. Inagaki, K. (1992). Piagetian and post-Piagetian conceptions of development and their implications for science education in early childhood. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7(1), 115-133.

  14. Kaware, S. S., & Sain, S. K. (2015). ICT application in education: an overview. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Approach & Studies, 2(1), 25-32.

  15. Lickona, T. (2009). Educating for character: How our schools can teach respect and responsibility. New York: Bantam Books.

  16. Lombardi, D., Shipley, T. F., Bailey, J. M., Bretones, P. S., Prather, E. E., Ballen, C. J., Knight, J. K., Smith, M. K., Stowe, R. L., Cooper, M. M., Prince, M., Atit, K., Uttal, D. H., LaDue, N. D., McNeal, P. M., Ryker, K., St. John, K., van der Hoeven Kraft, K. J., & Docktor, J. L. (2021). The curious construct of active learning. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 22(1), 8-43.

  17. Mahfudy, S., Wahyu, K., Mauliddin, M., Sucipto, L., Evendi, E., & Irpan, S. (2019). Characters and values in mathematics teaching and learning: A review of research in Indonesia. Beta: Jurnal Tadris Matematika, 12(1), 60-81.

  18. Matusov, E., & Hayes, R. (2000). Sociocultural critique of Piaget and Vygotsky. New Ideas in Psychology, 18(2), 215-239.

  19. Mayer, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. London: Cambridge University Press.

  20. Meyer, B., Haywood, N., Sachdev, D., & Faraday, S. (2008). What is independent learning and what are the benefits for students. Department for Children, Schools and Families Research Report, 51, 1-6.

  21. Mosa, E. (2006). Current Development in Technology Assisted Education. Firenze: Formatex.

  22. Nazir, M. J., Rizvi, A. H., & Pujeri, R. V. (2012). Skill development in multimedia based learning environment in higher education: An operational model. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Research, 2(11), 820-828.

  23. Nur, I. R. D., Herman, T., & Mariyana, R. (2018). Logical-mathematics intellegence in early childhood students. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 8(4), 105-109.

  24. Piaget, J. (1976). Piaget’s Theory. In B. Inhelder, H. H. Chipman, & C. Zwingmann (Eds.), Piaget and His School: A Reader in Developmental Psychology (pp. 11-23). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

  25. Piaget, J. (2013). The construction of reality in the child (Vol. 82). Routledge.

  26. Ryan, K., & Bohlin, K. E. (1999). Building character in schools: Practical ways to bring moral instruction to life. ERIC.

  27. Singh, H., & Reed, C. (2001). A white paper: Achieving success with blended learning. Centra software, 1, 1-11.

  28. Skemp, R. R. (2002). Mathematics in the primary school. Routledge.

  29. Stankov, L., & Cregan, A. (1993). Quantitative and qualitative properties of an intelligence test: Series completion. Learning and Individual Differences, 5(2), 137-169.

  30. Sternberg, R. J. (2018). Theories of intelligence. In APA handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 145-161). American Psychological Association.

  31. Sukestiyarno, Y. L., Cahyono, A. N., & Pradnya, I. N. (2019). Integrating character education in mathematics learning in Indonesia and Denmark. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1321(3), 032014.

  32. Suryani, A. (2010). ICT in education: Its benefits, difficulties, and organizational development issues. Jurnal Sosial Humaniora (JSH), 3(1), 13-33.

  33. Thomas, L. G., & Knezek, D. G. (2008). Information, communications, and educational technology standards for students, teachers, and school leaders. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds.), International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 333-348). Springer US.

  34. Tudge, J., & Rogoff, B. (1989). Peer influences on cognitive development: Piagetian and Vygotskian perspectives. In M. H. Bornstein & J. S. Bruner (Eds.), Interaction in human development. (pp. 17-40). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

  35. Van Hooft, S. (1995). Caring: An essay in the philosophy of ethics. University Press of Colorado Niwot, CO.

  36. Wertsch, J. V., & Tulviste, P. (1992). LS Vygotsky and contemporary developmental psychology. Developmental psychology, 28(4), 548-557.