Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Open access Journal

The Analysis of Creative Thinking Ability Viewed from Student Metacognition in Learning Cycle 5E Assisted by Learning Management System

Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research · Vol. 11 No. 1 (2022) · pp. 88–101

ISSN
2502-4507, 2252-6455
Published
2022-06-30
Publisher
Universitas Negeri Semarang
Language
eng
License
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0

Abstract

This study aims to describe the ability to think creatively in terms of students' metacognition with the 5E learning cycle assisted by LMS. The research subjects were twelve students with the high metacognition, ten students with the medium metacogniton, and ten students with low metacognition. Methods of collecting data using observation techniques using questionnaires or metacognition questionnaires. Based on the results of this study indicate that subjects with a high metacognition category have good knowledge of understanding important information. On the other hand, the subject is conscientious, focused, and confident that the implementation of the strategy is effective in solving problems. Subjects understand well the questions and organize important information. The results of the work are systematic and correct, and the subject is also aware of errors in the work process. In contrast to the metacognitive category of subjects who currently have good knowledge. In addition, the subject is quite good at writing conclusions. Subjects still need to be careful in monitoring the results of their work. The subject is quite good at evaluating the results of his work. Meanwhile, subjects with low metacognition have sufficient knowledge in understanding information. The subject has difficulty managing his strategy well. In addition, the subject cannot justify the wrong answer and is not careful in monitoring the results of the answer. Subjects do an adequate assessment of the results of their work.

Collaboration network of the authors

40 authors · 174 co-authorship links · 7 across different organisations · showing the 40 most connected

Hover or tap a name to highlight its co-authors. Double-click to open the author's page.

  • State University of Semarang
  • Universitas Airlangga
  • University of Surabaya
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Different organisations
  • Same organisation
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Thicker line = more joint articles · bigger circle = more articles
Show as table
Co-authorOrganisationJoint articles
Kartono KartonoUniversitas Airlangga17
Masrukan MasrukanState University of Semarang8
Isnarto IsnartoAffiliation unknown6
Zaenuri ZaenuriState University of Semarang5
Adi Nur CahyonoAffiliation unknown5
Mulyono MulyonoAffiliation unknown5
Scolastika MarianiState University of Semarang4
Rochmad RochmadAffiliation unknown4
Budi WaluyaAffiliation unknown4
Ani RusilowatiState University of Semarang3
Dwijanto DwijantoAffiliation unknown3
Sugiman SugimanAffiliation unknown3
BERNIKA RAHMANIA NALURITAAffiliation unknown3
Hardi SuyitnoAffiliation unknown3
Stevanus Budi WaluyaAffiliation unknown2
Saiful RidloState University of Semarang2
Heriyanto HeriyantoAffiliation unknown2
Aisyah Fany AchmaliaAffiliation unknown2
Endang Retno WinartiAffiliation unknown2
Muhammad Dwi YantoAffiliation unknown2
Iwan JunaediState University of Semarang2
Winardi WinardiUniversity of Surabaya2
Tri WahyuningsihAffiliation unknown2
Nurkaromah DwidayatiAffiliation unknown2
Yodie Nur HidayatAffiliation unknown2
Tri Sri Noor AsihAffiliation unknown2
Hendi Widi PriyonggoAffiliation unknown2
Ignasia Santi Kumala SwariAffiliation unknown2
Mohammad AsikinAffiliation unknown2
Nikmah NurvicalestiAffiliation unknown2
Masjaya MasjayaAffiliation unknown2
Sunarmi SunarmiAffiliation unknown2
Putriaji HendikawatiAffiliation unknown2
Indrati RahayuAffiliation unknown2
Anita SulistyawatiAffiliation unknown2
Muh. Fajar SafaatullahAffiliation unknown2
Ayu AristikaState University of Semarang1

Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.

Metadata source: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/ujmer/oai, first harvested 6 Nov 2026, last seen 6 Nov 2026.
Original metadata (oai_dc)
<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en-US">The Analysis of Creative Thinking Ability Viewed from Student Metacognition in Learning Cycle 5E Assisted by Learning Management System</dc:title>
	<dc:creator>Firdaus, Anita Aulia</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator>wardono, Wardono</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator>Walid, Walid</dc:creator>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en-US">This study aims to describe the ability to think creatively in terms of students' metacognition with the 5E learning cycle assisted by LMS. The research subjects were twelve students with the high metacognition, ten students with the medium metacogniton, and ten students with low metacognition. Methods of collecting data using observation techniques using questionnaires or metacognition questionnaires. Based on the results of this study indicate that subjects with a high metacognition category have good knowledge of understanding important information. On the other hand, the subject is conscientious, focused, and confident that the implementation of the strategy is effective in solving problems. Subjects understand well the questions and organize important information. The results of the work are systematic and correct, and the subject is also aware of errors in the work process. In contrast to the metacognitive category of subjects who currently have good knowledge. In addition, the subject is quite good at writing conclusions. Subjects still need to be careful in monitoring the results of their work. The subject is quite good at evaluating the results of his work. Meanwhile, subjects with low metacognition have sufficient knowledge in understanding information. The subject has difficulty managing his strategy well. In addition, the subject cannot justify the wrong answer and is not careful in monitoring the results of the answer. Subjects do an adequate assessment of the results of their work.
&amp;nbsp;</dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en-US">Universitas Negeri Semarang</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2022-06-30</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:type xml:lang="en-US">Peer-reviewed Article</dc:type>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/ujmer/article/view/55344</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en-US">Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research; Vol 11 No 1 (2022): June 2022; 88-101</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2502-4507</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2252-6455</dc:source>
	<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/ujmer/article/view/55344/22242</dc:relation>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en-US">Copyright (c) 2022 Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research</dc:rights>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en-US">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>