Commognitive Siswa dalam Menyelesaikan Masalah Persamaan Linier Satu Variabel

Faula Rossydha, Toto Nusantara, Sukoriyanto Sukoriyanto

Abstract


Abstract: This study aims to describe the students' commognitive in solving linear problems of one variable. This study uses a qualitative approach to the type of descriptive research. The stages in this study consisted of preparation, data collection, and data analysis. The results of this study are that there are two strategies students use in solving problems when analyzed using commognitive components. Two strategies used by students are the strategy of finding patterns and trial and error strategies. Students with strategies finding patterns in using commognitive components in solving problems look systematic compared to students with trial and error strategies.

Abstrak: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan commognitive siswa dalam menyelesaikan masalah persamaan linier satu variabel. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan jenis penelitian deskriptif. Tahapan dalam penelitian ini terdiri dari persiapan, pengumpulan data, dan analisis data. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah terdapat dua strategi yang digunakan siswa dalam menyelesaikan masalah apabila dianalisis menggunakan komponen commognitive. Dua strategi yang digunakan siswa yaitu strategi menemukan pola dan stretegi coba-coba. Siswa dengan strategi menemukan pola dalam menggunakan komponen commognitive dalam menyelesaikan masalah terlihat sistematis dibandingkan siswa dengan strategi coba-coba.

Keywords


commognitive; problem solving; one variable linear equation; commognitive; penyelesaian masalah; persamaan linier satu variabel

Full Text:

PDF

References


DAFTAR RUJUKAN

Baiduri, B. (2014). A Relational Thinking Process of Elementery School Students with High Capability. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 4(2), 24–34. https://doi.org/10.5539/jedp.v4n2p24

Berger, M. (2013). Examining Mathematical Discourse to Understand in-Service Teachers’ Mathematical Activities. Pythagoras, 34(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4102/pythagoras.v34i1.197

Blum, W., & Niss, M. (1991). Applied Mathematical Problems Solving, Modeling, Aplications, and Links to Other Subjects: State, Trends and Issues in Mathematics Instruction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22(1), 37–68.

García, T., Boom, J., Kroesbergen, E. H., Núñez, J. C., & Rodríguez, C. (2019). Planning, Execution, and Revision in Mathematics Problem Solving: Does the Order of the Phases Matter? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 61(August 2018), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.03.001

Hudojo, H. (1998). Belajar Mengajar Matematika. Jakarta: Depdiknas, Proyek P2LPTK.

Intaros, P., Inprasitha, M., & Srisawadi, N. (2014). Students’ Problem Solving Strategies in Problem Solving-Mathematics Classroom. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 4119–4123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.901

Kim, D. J., Choi, S., & Lim, W. (2017). Sfard’s Commognitive Framework as a Method of Discourse Analysis in Mathematics. Nternational Journal of Cognitive and Language Sciences, 11(11), 481–485.

Leong, Y. H., Tay, E. G., Toh, T. L., Quek, K. S., & Dindyal, J. (2011). Reviving Pólya’s “ Look Back” in a Singapore school. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 30(3), 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2011.07.005

Magruder, R. L. (University of K. (2012). Solving Linear Equations : A Comparison of Concrete and Virtual Manipulatives in Middle School Mathematics. 251. Retrieved from http://uknowledge.uky.edu/edc_etds/2

Mudaly, V., & Mpofu, S. (2019). Learners’ Views on Asymptotes of a Hyperbola and Exponential Function: A Commognitive Approach. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 77(6), 734–744. https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/19.77.734

NCTM. (2000). Princicples and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.

Ngin, C. S. (2018). Examining a Teacher’s Use of Multiple Representations in the Teaching of Percentages : A Commognitive Perspective. Proceedings of the 41st Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, 591–598.

Phonapichat, P., Wongwanich, S., & Sujiva, S. (2014). An Analysis of Elementary School Students’ Difficulties in Mathematical Problem Solving. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116(2012), 3169–3174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.728

Polya, G. (1957). HowToSolveIt lengkap. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Presmeg, N. (2016). Commognition as a Lens for Research. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 91(3), 423–430. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-015-9676-1

Roberts, A., & le Roux, K. L. (2019). Erratum: A Commognitive Perspective on Grade 8 and Grade 9 Learner Thinking about Linear Equations. Pythagoras, 40(1), 1–1. https://doi.org/10.4102/PYTHAGORAS.V40I1.519

Sfard, A. (2007). When the Rules of Discourse Change, but Nobody Tells You: Making Sense of Mathematics Learning from a Commognitive Stand Point. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(4), 565-613 https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400701525253

Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking As Communicaticating: Human Development, The Growth of Discourses, and Mathematizing. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511499944

Subanji. (2013). Teori Pembelajaran Kreatif dan Inovatif. Malang: UM Press.

Szetala, W., & Nicol, C. (1992). Evaluating Problem Solving in Mathematics. Educational Leadership, 49(8), 42–45.

Tasara, I. (2017). Commognitive analysis of a teacher’s mathematical discourse on the derivative. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 37(3), 1–6.

Thoma, A., & Nardi, E. (2016). Routines in the Didactical and Mathematical Discourses of Closed-Book Examination Tasks A Commognitive Analysis of Closed-Book Examination Tasks and Lecturers’ Perspectives. First Conference of International Network for Didactic Research in University Mathematics.

Viirman, O. (2015). Explanation, Motivation and Question Posing Routines in University Mathematics Teachers’ Pedagogical Discourse: A Commognitive Analysis. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 46(8), 1165–1181. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2015.1034206

Witness, S., Monwabisi, S., & Ralarala, K. (2014). Making Sense of Mathematical Discourse: Implications for Success in the Learning of Differentiation in a University Classroom. Alternation Special Edition No, 12(12), 326–357.

Zayyadi, M., Nusantara, T., Subanji, Hidayanto, E., & Sulandra, I. M. (2019). A commognitive framework: The Process of Solving Mathematical Problems of Middle School Students. International Journal of Learning, Teaching, and Educational Research, 18(2), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.18.2.7




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17977/jptpp.v6i1.14367

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2021 Faula Rossydha, Toto Nusantara, Sukoriyanto Sukoriyanto

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

JPtpp is accredited “Rank 3” as a scientific journal under the decree of the Directorate General of Research Enhancement and Development, Ministry of Research, Technology, and Higher Education, dated December 7, 2022, No: 225/E/KPT/2022, effective for five years from Volume 7 Issue 8, 2022 until Volume 12 Issue 7, 2027. Link to download

Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian, & Pengembangan

Journal of Education: Theory, Research, and Development

Graduate School Of Universitas Negeri Malang

Lisensi Creative Commons

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