Kesalahan Siswa yang Mengalami Split Attention dalam Menyelesaikan Masalah SPLDV

Gita Fajrin Jafar, Gatot Muhsetyo, I Nengah Parta


Abstract: The purpose of this research is to describe student errors that experience split attention in solving SPLDV problems. The subject of this study were two eighth grade students in SMP Muhammadiyah 2 Malang who experienced split attention. The instrument used in this research was a mathematical problem consisting of one SPLDV problem. The results of this research show that students who experienced split attention made factual errors and procedural errors in solving SPLDV problems. Factual errors made by students is that they cannot define the x and y variables they have made. Procedural errors is not being able to determine the resolution steps for the SPLDV problem. In addition, students also cannot use the addition operation correctly. The most common error is procedure error.

Abstrak: Tujuan penelitian ini adalah mendeskripsikan kesalahan siswa yang mengalami split attention dalam menyelesaikan masalah SPLDV. Subjek penelitian ini adalah dua siswa kelas VIII SMP Muhammadiyah 2 Malang yang mengalami split attention. Instrumen yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah masalah matematika yang terdiri dari satu soal SPLDV. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa siswa yang mengalami split attention melakukan kesalahan fakta dan kesalahan prosedur dalam menyelesaikan masalah yang SPLDV. Kesalahan fakta yang dilakukan siswa adalah tidak dapat mendefinisikan variabel x dan y yang telah dibuatnya. Kesalahan prosedur yang dilakukan adalah tidak dapat menentukan langkah-langkah penyelesaian untuk masalah SPLDV.  Selain itu, siswa juga tidak dapat menggunakan operasi penjumlahan dengan tepat. Kesalahan yang paling banyak dilakukan adalah kesalahan prosedur.


error; split attention; kesalahan; split attention

Full Text:



Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. H. (Ed.). (2009). Psychology of Classroom Learning: An Encyclopedia. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA/Gale Cengage Learning.

As’asri, A. R., Tohir, M., & Valentino, E. (2017). Matematika-Kelas VIII SMP/MTs-Semester 1. Jakarta.

Ayres, P. L. (2001). Systematic Mathematical Errors and Cognitive Load. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(2), 227–248.

Ayres, P., & Sweller, J. (2005). The Split-Attention Principle in Multimedia Learning. Dalam R. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (hlm. 135–146).

Brown, J., & Skow, K. (2016). Mathematics: Identifying and Addressing Student Errors. Diambil dari

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4 ed.).

Eggen, P., & Kauchak, D. (2003). Educational Psychology Windows on Classroom (6 ed.).

Falcon, R. (2009). Algebraic Reasoning in the Middle Grades: A View of Student Strategies in Pictorial and Algebraic System of Equations.

Jong, T. de. (2010). Cognitive Load Theory, Educational Research, and Instructional Design: Some Food for Thought. Instructional Science, 38(2), 105–134.

Kalyuga, S. (2009). Managing Cognitive Load in Adaptive Multimedia Learning. New York: Information Science Reference.

Kalyuga, S., Chander, P., & Sweller, J. (1999). Managing Split-Attention and Redundancy in Multimedia Instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 351–371.

Korlakin, T., White, E., Breaux, K. C., DeBlase, E., O’Brien, R., Howell, M., & Courville, T. (2016). Patterns of Cognitive Strengths and Weaknesses and Relationships to Math Errors. 1–13.

Maryono, A. (2014). Pola Pikir Sistem. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.

Maryono, M., Sutawidjaya, A., Subanji, S., & Irawati, S. (2017). Implementation of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) of Mathematics Teachers in Teaching Practice: A Case Study. Canadian Center of Science and Education, 10, 11–26.

Mayer, R. (2014). The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (2 ed.).

McCloskey, G. (2017). Error Analysis: Past, Present, and Future. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 35(1-2), 242–250.

Moreno, R. (2006). When Worked Examples Don’t Work: Is Cognitive Load Theory at an Impasse? Learning and Instruction, 16(2), 170–181.

Özçelik1, E., Cagiltay, E., Sengul, G., & Tuner, E. (2014). The Effect of Split Attention in Surgical Education. Springer International Publishing Switzerland, 3–10.

Pangesti, F. T. P. (2015). Efek Cognitive Load Theory dalam Mendesain Bahan Ajar Geometri.

Pociask, F. D., & Morrison, G. (2004). The Effects of Split-Attention and Redundancy on Cognitive Load When Learning Cognitive and Psychomotor Tasks. 707–718.

Sarwadi, H. R. H., & Shahrill, M. (2014). Understanding Students’ Mathematical Errors and Misconceptions: The Case of Year 11 Repeating Students. 2014, 1–10.

Smith, E., E., & Kosslyn, S., M. (2014). Psikologi Kognitif : Pikiran dan Otak (Bahasa Indonesia). Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Solso, R., L., Maclin, O., H., & Maclin, M. K. (2008). Cognitive Psychology (8 ed.).

Subanji, S. (2015). Teori Kesalahan Konstruksi Konsep dan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika. Malang: Universitas Negeri Malang.

Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive Load Theory (1. ed). New York, NY: Springer.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2019 Gita Fajrin Jafar, Gatot Muhsetyo, I Nengah Parta

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

JPtpp is accredited “Rank 2” as a scientific journal under the decree of the Directorate General of Research Enhancement and Development, Ministry of Research, Technology, and Higher Education, dated October 24, 2018, No: 30/E/KPT/2018, effective for five years from Volume 3 Issue 1, 2018 until Volume 7 Issue 8, 2022.

Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian, & Pengembangan

Journal Of Education

Graduate School Of Universitas Negeri Malang

Lisensi Creative Commons

JPtpp is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License