Differential problems with different type solutions of mathematics education’s students

Swastika, Galuh Tyasing; Nusantara, Toto; Subanji, Subanji; Irawati, Santi

doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1175/1/012144

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Solving mathematical word problems is influenced both by the type of problem (Gros, Sander, et al, 2020; Gros, Thibaut, et al, 2020; Mayer, 1982; Swastika et al, 2019) and heuristic prompts (Doris Yaneth Peñaloza & Meneses Espinal, 2019), and these influences may be reflected in the problem solver's search for relevant information in the text of the word problem to process features. Wiese (2007) argues that children initially learn numbers in a cardinal context and then apply them to ordinal numbers that can represent levels.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metacognitive prompts and numerical ordinality in solving word problems: An eye‐tracking study

Kang

Tang

Zhang

et al. 2023

Brit J of Edu Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe ability to translate concrete manipulatives into abstract mathematical formulas can aid in the solving of mathematical word problems among students, and metacognitive prompts play a significant role in enhancing this process.AimsBased on the concept of semantic congruence, we explored the effects of metacognitive prompts and numerical ordinality on information searching and cognitive processing, throughout the process of solving mathematical word problems among primary school students in China.SampleParticipants included 73 primary school students (38 boys and 35 girls) with normal or corrected visual acuity.MethodsThis study was based on a 2 (prompt information: no‐prompt, metacognitive‐prompt) × 2 (number attribute: cardinal number, ordinal number) mixed experimental design. We analysed multiple eye‐movement indices, such as fixation duration, saccadic amplitude, and pupil size, since they pertained to the areas of interest.ResultsWhen solving both types of problems, pupil sizes were significantly smaller under the metacognitive‐prompt condition compared with the no‐prompt condition, and shorter dwell time for specific sentences, conditional on metacognitive prompts, indicated the optimization of the presented algorithm. Additionally, the levels of fixation durations and saccadic amplitudes were significantly higher when solving ordinal number word problems compared with solving ordinal number problems, indicating that primary school students were less efficient in reading and faced increased levels of difficulty when solving ordinal number problems.ConclusionsThe results indicate that for Chinese upper‐grade primary school students, cognitive load was lower in the metacognitive prompting condition and when solving cardinal problems, and higher when solving ordinal problems.

show abstract