Completion for a Geometric-Function Problem: Process and Resources in Efficiency Consideration

Fiki Alghadari(1*), Bayu Jaya Tama(2), Sudirman Sudirman(3), Arie Purwa Kusuma(4), Syafa'at Ariful Huda(5)

(1) STKIP Kusuma Negara
(2) Universitas Indraprasta PGRI
(3) Universitas Wiralodra
(4) STKIP Kusuma Negara
(5) STKIP Kusuma Negara
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


The cognitive level between teachers and students is clearly different in problem-solving. In the mathematics context, especially the function problem was only in geometric expression form, for knowledge construction and student's learning should use their cognitive level capacity. Not only the solving process is based on that, but also learning should be efficient for all students, and analyzing those processes is the purpose of identification inefficient issues in this study. This investigative study was held on three respondents purposively selected from a science program of senior high school in West Jakarta, Indonesia. This study found that in the solving process, all students chose to construct an algebraic representation of the function by organizing concepts relevant to fragmented conceptualization. The process has held to apply each concept procedurally. There has been a resource and that is one concept of the domain of function, so the completion is an inefficient process because all three students were ignoring it to use. All three process for solving to the student’s academic culture, most common for emphasizing in learning related to the problem and their cognitive capacity.

Keywords


algebraic representation, calculus, conceptualization, domain function.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Alghadari, F., & Herman, T. (2018). The obstacles of geometric problem-solving on solid with vector and triangle approach. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1132(1), 012046.

Alghadari, F., & Noor, N. A. (2021). Conceptual technique for comparison figures by geometric thinking in analysis level. Journal for the Mathematics Education and Teaching Practices, 2(1), 1–8.

Alghadari, F., Yuni, Y., & Wulandari, A. (2019). Conceptualization in solving a geometric-function problem : An effective and efficient process. Journal of Physics: Conf. Series, 012004.

Angelina, C., Siregar, J., Kusnadi, S. A. A., Jannah, M., Wardani, S. I., & Leonard, L. (2021). Pengembangan Media Pembelajaran Roda Berputar untuk Materi Trigonometri. Journal of Instructional Development Research, 2(2), 81–94.

Azami, B., Dessolina, D., Kristina, E., Pratiwi, M., Handayani, N., Freticilia, S. G., & Leonard, L. (2021). Pengembangan Media Pembelajaran Rolling Ball untuk Materi Fungsi dan Invers. Journal of Instructional Development Research, 2(2), 69–80.

Berger, M., Bowie, L., & Nyaumwe, L. J. (2010). Taxonomy matters: Cognitive levels and types of mathematical activities in mathematics examinations. Pythagoras, 0(71), 30–40.

Bicer, A., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2013). Integrating Writing into Mathematics Classroom to Increase Students’ Problem Solving Skills. International Online Journal of Education Sciences, 5(2), 361–369.

Borji, V., Font, V., Alamolhodaei, H., & Sánchez, A. (2018). Application of the Complementarities of Two Theories, APOS and OSA, for the Analysis of the University Students ’ Understanding on the Graph of the Function and its Derivative. EurasiaJournal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(6), 2301–2315.

Çal??kan, N., Kahya, E., & Durmus, Y. T. (2018). An Analysis of Mathematics Questions of the Tpese Exam According to Cognitive Levels of Timss 2015. Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 7(5), 67.

Choi, Y. J., & Hong, J. K. (2014). On the students thinking of the properties of derivatives. Journal Korean Society of The Mathematical Education, 53(1), 25–40.

Csapó, B., & Funke, J. (2017). The development and assessment of problem solving in 21st-century schools. In C. Ben? & F. Joachim (Eds.), Educational Research and Innovation: The Nature of Problem Solving: Using Research to Inspire 21st Century Learning (pp. 19–32).

Dossey, J. A. (2017). Problem Solving from a Mathematical Standpoint. In C. Ben? & F. Joachim (Eds.), Educational Research and Innovation: The Nature of Problem Solving Using Research to Inspire 21st Century Learning (pp. 59–72). OECD Publishing.

Faradillah, A. (2018). Analysis of Mathematical Reasoning Ability of Pre-Service Mathematics Teachers in Solving Algebra Problem Based on Reflective and Impulsive Cognitive Style. Formatif: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan MIPA, 8(2), 119–128. https://doi.org/10.30998/formatif.v8i2.2333

Fashihah, & Qohar, A. (2020). Analysis of Mathematical Representation Process Standard in Learning Mathematics on Relation Concept. Formatif: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan MIPA, 10(148), 115–124.

Gareis, C. R., & Grant, L. W. (2015). Teacher-Made Assessments: How to Connect Curriculum, Instruction, and Student Learning (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Hanafi, M. (2015). Manajemen. Universitas Terbuka Press.

Hess, K. K. (2006). Exploring Cognitive Demand in Instruction and Assessment. In Cognitive Complexity (pp. 1–7).

Hong, Y. Y., & Thomas, M. O. J. (2014). Graphical construction of a local perspective on differentiation and integration. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 27(2), 183–200.

Hutajulu, M., Perbowo, K. S., Alghadari, F., Minarti, E. D., & Hidayat, W. (2022). The process of conceptualization in solving geometric-function problems. Infinity Journal, 11(1), 145. https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v11i1.p145-162

Jelatu, S., & Kurnila, V. S. (2019). Analysis of Translation Understanding from Verbal to Visual on Trigonometry Concept. Formatif: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan MIPA, 9(3), 191–202. https://doi.org/10.30998/formatif.v9i3.3663

Kop, P. M. G. M., Janssen, F. J. J. M., Drijvers, P. H. M., Veenman, M. V. J., & Driel, J. H. Van. (2015). Identifying a framework for graphing formulas from expert strategies. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 39, 121–134.

Lin, J. J. H., & Lin, S. S. J. (2014). Cognitive Load for Configuration Comprehension in Computer-Supported Geometry Problem Solving: an Eye Movement Perspective. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(3), 605–627.

Maulyda, M. A., Sukoriyanto, S., Hidayati, V. R., Erfan, M., & Umar, U. (2020). Student Representation in Solving Story Problems Using Polya Steps. Formatif: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan MIPA, 10(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.30998/formatif.v10i1.4629

Nagle, C., Moore-Russo, D., Viglietti, J., & Martin, K. (2013). Calculus Students’ and Instructors’ Conceptualizations of Slope: a Comparison Across Academic Levels. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(6), 1491–1515.

Noor, N. A., & Alghadari, F. (2021). Case of Actualizing Geometry Knowledge in Abstraction Thinking Level for Constructing a Figure. International Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics, 8(1), 16–26. https://doi.org/10.17278/ijesim.797749

Ozdogan, S. S., Ozçakir, B., & Orhan, B. (2019). A Case of Teacher and Student Mathematical Problem-Solving Behaviors from the Perspective of a Cognitive-Metacognitive Framework. Studia Paedagogica, 24(4), 221. https://doi.org/10.5817/SP2019-4-10

Panaoura, A., Michael-chrysanthou, P., Gagatsis, A., Elia, I., & Philippou, A. (2016). A Structural Model Related to the Understanding of the Concept of Function : Definition and Problem Solving. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(4), 723–740.

Philpot, R., Ramalingam, D., Dossey, J. A., & McCrae, B. (2017). Factors that influence the difficulty of problem-solving items. In C. Ben? & F. Joachim (Eds.), Educational Research and Innovation: The Nature of Problem Solving Using Research to Inspire 21st Century Learning (pp. 141–158). OECD Publishing.

Radmehr, F., & Drake, M. (2017). Revised Bloom’s taxonomy and integral calculus: unpacking the knowledge dimension. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 48(8), 1206–1224.

Radmehr, F., & Drake, M. (2018). An assessment-based model for exploring the solving of mathematical problems: Utilizing revised bloom’s taxonomy and facets of metacognition. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 59, 41–51.

Sudirman, S., Son, A. L., Rosyadi, R., & Fitriani, R. N. (2020). Uncovering the Students’ Mathematical Concept Understanding Ability: a Based Study of Both Students’ Cognitive Styles Dependent and Independent Field in Overcoming the Problem of 3D Geometry. Formatif: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan MIPA, 10(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.30998/formatif.v10i1.3789

Tobin, P. (2007). International Baccalaureate Mathematics Standard Level (F. Cirrito (ed.); 3rd ed.). IBID Press.

Tokgoz, E., & Gualpa, G. (2015). STEM Majors’ Cognitive Calculus Ability to Sketch a Function Graph. American Society for Engineering Education, 26.1396.1-26.1396.13.

Vale, I., & Barbosa, A. (2018). Mathematical problems : the advantages of visual strategies. Journal of the European Teacher Education Network, 13, 23–33.

Veloo, A., & Krishnasamy, H. N. (2015). Types of Student Errors in Mathematical Symbols , Graphs and Problem-Solving. Asian Social Science, 11(15), 324–334.

Wagner, J., & Sharp, J. (2017). A Calculus Activity with Foundations in Geometric Learning. Mathematics Teacher, 110(8), 618–623.

Ward, T. B. (2012). Problem Solving. In M. D. Mumford (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Creativity (pp. 169–188). Academic Press.

Widodo, S. A., Cahyani, E. R., & Istiqomah, I. (2020). Single Subject Research : Learning Algebra Operations in Introverted Students. Formatif: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan MIPA, 10(2), 133–142.

Yee, S. P., & Bostic, J. D. (2014). Developing a contextualization of students’ mathematical problem solving. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 36, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2014.08.002

Yuni, Y., Alghadari, F., Wulandari, A., & Huda, S. A. (2021). Student Thinking Levels in Solving Open-Ended Geometric-Function Problem by Algebraic Representation Approach. Proceedings of the 1st Annual International Conference on Natural and Social Science Education (ICNSSE 2020), 547(1), 333–341. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210430.050




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30998/formatif.v12i2.10365

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2022 Formatif: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan MIPA

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

Publisher:
Institute for Research and Community Services
(LPPM) Universitas Indraprasta PGRI
Kampus A Building 3, 2nd Floor | Jl. Nangka No. 58 C (TB. Simatupang), Kel. Tanjung Barat, Kec. Jagakarsa, Jakarta Selatan 12530, Jakarta, Indonesia. 


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

View My Stats