Student Thinking Process in Solving Mathematical Representation Problems
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22219/mej.v7i1.24830Abstract
This research was qualitative research with descriptive approach, which aimed determined the level of success of students in solving representation problems based on the type of representation, namely numbers, algebra, geometry, and statistics and to know their thinking processes. The subjects of this study were first semester students at Patompo University who were selected using a purposive sampling technique. The subjects of this study were 2 students in each representational domain. Data were analyzed to determine the results of problem solving and students' thinking processes in solving representation problems in mathematics. Based on the results of the research on solving visual representation problems based on TRM-01 and TRM-02, most of the students failed especially in algebraic material which was caused by difficulties in solving representation problems. This is shown based on the percentage of students' success in solving representation questions.
Downloads
References
Baker, R. S., Corbett, A. T., & Koedinger, K. R. (2001). Toward a model of learning data representations. In the Proceedings of the 23rd Annual COnference of the Cognitive Science Society, 45–50. https://doi.org/10.1184/R1/6470567.v1
Ceuppens, S., Deprez, J., Dehaene, W., & De Cock, M. (2018). Design and validation of a test for representational fluency of 9th grade students in physics and mathematics: The case of linear functions. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 14(2), 20105. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.020105
Goldberg, F. M., & Anderson, J. H. (1989). Student difficulties with graphical representations of negative values of velocity. The Physics Teacher, 27(4), 254–260. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2342748
Goldin, G., & Shteingold, N. (2001). Systems of representations and the development of mathematical concepts. In The roles of representation in school mathematics (pp. 1–23). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Hindi, A. N. A., & HR, I. S. (2020). Analysis of Understanding Concept in Solving Mathematics Story problems Using CRI in Terms of Personality Types. Daya Matematis: Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Matematika, 8(3), 229–236. https://doi.org/10.26858/jdm.v8i3.15342
HR, I. S., & Hindi, A. N. A. (2020). Analysis of Cognitive Conflict with Intervention on the Understanding of Geometry Concepts in SMA. Daya Matematis: Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Matematika, 8(3), 193. https://doi.org/10.26858/jdm.v8i3.15341
Kosslyn, S. M. (2006). Graph Design for The Eye and Mind. Oxford University Press.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Lowrie, T., & Diezmann, C. M. (2007). Solving graphics problems: Student performance in junior grades. Journal of Educational Research, 100(6), 369–378. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.100.6.369-378
Lowrie, T., & Diezmann, C. M. (2009). National numeracy tests: A graphic tells A thousand words. Australian Journal of Education, 53(2), 141–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/000494410905300204
Lowrie, T., Diezmann, C. M., & Logan, T. (2011). Understanding graphicacy: Students’ making sense of graphics in mathematics assessment tasks. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 1--32. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/48802/
Mainali, B. (2021). Representation in Teaching and Learning Mathematics To cite this article : International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 9(1), 0–21. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.1111
Mukherjee, K., Yin, B., Sherman, B. E., Lessard, L., & Schloss, K. B. (2021). Context Matters: A Theory of Semantic Discriminability for Perceptual Encoding Systems. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 28(1), 697–706. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2021.3114780
NCTM. (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Neria, D., & Amit, M. (2004). Students preference of non-algebraic representations in mathematical communication. Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Eduation, 3, 409–416. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED489599
Nizaruddin, S., Waluyo, B., Rochmad, & Isnarto. (2020). Mathematical Translation of Verbal Representation to Symbol Representation: A Case Study in Prospective Teachers Having High Mathematical Ability. International Conference on Science and Education and Technology, 443(Iset 2019), 87–91. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200620.017
Nurrahmawati, Sa’dijah, C., Sudirman, & Muksar, M. (2021). Assessing students’ errors in mathematical translation: From symbolic to verbal and graphic representations. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 10(1), 115–125. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v10i1.20819
Panasuk, R. M., & Beyranevand, M. L. (2010). Algebra Students’ Ability to Recognize Multiple Representations and Achievement. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 1–18. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ904885
Pedersen, M. K., Bach, C. C., Gregersen, R. M., Højsted, I. H., & Jankvist, U. T. (2021). Mathematical representation competency in relation to use of digital technology and task design—a literature review. Mathematics, 9(4), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9040444
Priti, S., & James, H. (2002). Review of Graph Comprehension Research:Implications for Instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 47–69. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013180410169
Santrock, J. W. (2018). Educational psychology: Theory and application to fitness and performance. McGraw-Hill Education.
Shreiner, T. L., & Guzdial, M. (2022). The information won’t just sink in: Helping teachers provide technology‐assisted data literacy instruction in social studies. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(5), 1134–1158. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13255
Solso, R. L., Maclin, O. H. ., & Maclin, M. K. (2014). Cognitif Psikology. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data.
Sumaji, Sa’Dijah, C., Susiswo, & Sisworo. (2019). Students’ problem in communicating mathematical problem solving of Geometry. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 243(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/243/1/012128
Ulusoy, F., & Incikabi, L. (2019). Incorporating Representation-Based Instruction into Mathematics Teaching: Engaging Middle Schoolers with Multiple Representations of Adding Fractions. In Handbook of Research on Promoting Higher-Order Skills and Global Competencies in Life and Work (pp. 311–336). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-6331-0.ch019
Zhao, F., & Gaschler, R. (2022). Graph schema and best graph type to compare discrete groups: Bar, line, and pie. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.991420
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Alfiah Nurfadhilah AM. Hindi, Iwan Setiawan HR
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with MEJ (Mathematics Education Journal) agree to the following terms:
For all articles published in MEJ, copyright is retained by the authors. Authors give permission to the publisher to announce the work with conditions. When the manuscript is accepted for publication, the authors agree to automatic transfer of the publishing right to the publisher.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License 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 (See The Effect of Open Access).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
