Mathematics Problem Solving Based on Cognitive Style to Determine of Student Reasoning Abilities in the Covid-19 Pandemic Era

Maswar, Maswar; Tohir, Mohammad; Pradita, Diyah Ayu Rizki; Asyari, Dian Noer; Sardjono, Wahyu; Selviyanti, Erna

doi:10.35316/alifmatika.2022.v4i1.37-51

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on the results of data analysis, it is shown that subjects with FI cognitive style have a higher level than those with FD cognitive style. The results of this study are in line with the results of research by (Yusuf & Sukestiyarno, 2022;Kholid & Jayanti, 2022;Maswar, Tohir, Pradita, Asyari, Sardjono, & Selviyanti, 2022) which states that learning outcomes individuals with FI is better than individuals with FD. In contrast to the results of (Inayah, 2017) which shows that FI and FD are not different.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

Students’ Covariational Reasoning Reviewed From Cognitive Styles

Jaenudin¹

2022

AJPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Covariational reasoning is important for students because it is a basic ability to master mathematical concepts. However, in reality many students have difficulty in working on covariational reasoning. One of the factors that influence covariational reasoning is cognitive style. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze covariational reasoning based on cognitive style. The research method used in this study is a qualitative research on prospective mathematics teacher students as many as 4 people taken from 31 people. The research instrument used in this study was GEFT to determine cognitive style, covariational reasoning worksheets, and interviews. The results showed that subjects with FIK and FIL cognitive styles only met MA 3, but FIL had erroneous thoughts. Meanwhile, FDK only met MA 2 and FDL met MA 1. In general, subjects with FI cognitive style had better covariational reasoning abilities than subjects with FD cognitive style.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

Students’ Covariational Reasoning Reviewed From Cognitive Styles

Jaenudin¹

2022

AJPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The point (0,15) is the y-intercept of the graph. Based on the way of student with FD to find solution appropriates to characteristic of FD who thinks globally and tends to make a less depth analysis (Maswar et al, 2022). In addition, the student answers indicate that the student is less able to understand and interpret the situation from the equation, then it represents inflexibility in answering the problems.…”

Section: Algebra Communication Skill Of Fd and Fi Studentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Algebra Communication Skills and Creative Thinking Skill Levels: In Terms of Cognitive Style

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The students have difference in cognitive style. This research aimed to describe and analyze students’ communication skills and creative thinking skill level in view of field dependent and independent cognitive style on algebraic concept. Algebra communication skill is essential skill needed for solving mathematical problems. Algebra must be mastered by the students because related to other materials. Algebra topic analyzed in this study is quadratic equation word problems. The indicators of communication skill include (1) able to state the situation into mathematical notations, structures or symbols, (2) able to demonstrate and describe unique algorithms in problem solving, and 3) able to construct and explain real-world phenomena in graph, sentence, equation, table or other presentation. The student level of creative thinking skill can be seen from fluency, flexibility and novelty. This research used a mixed-method. The object were 16 students of junior high school in Tangerang. The data collection techniques used test and interview. Cognitive styles are grouped using the Group Embedded Figure Test (GEFT) which divide the students into field dependent (FD) and field independent (FI). The results of the study indicated that algebra communication skill of students with FD and FI were not different significantly in problem solving. Both are able to understand the problems into mathematical expressions, but not all groups state the correct mathematical equations. The students used different strategy to solve the problems. FD students used less detailed strategy, incomplete analysis, think generally, and not quite precise in writing mathematical equations, while FI students provided detailed explanations, better accuracy, think more flexibly, and state mathematical equation precisely. In general, they have same creative level.

show abstract

“…Flexibility refers to a student's ability to propose various ways to solve problems. The last, Novelty (originality), refers to the ability of students to answer problems with different answers and correct values or one answer that students do not usually do at their level of development [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Mathematical Creative Thinking Ability in Problem-Solving in Terms of Adversity Quotient

Saiful¹,

Atikurrahman²,

Tohir³

2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to analyze mathematical creative thinking skills in problem-solving in terms of the adversity quotient. This research is a qualitative descriptive study. It was conducted on 23 third-semester students of Tarbiyah Faculty at Ibrahimy University. The data were collected using a questionnaire, test, interviews, and documentation. The questionnaire was used to determine the Adversity Quotient scale. The test is to measure the students' mathematical creative thinking ability. The test results were used to divide the students into three groups based on their ability level. Two students were selected from each group to be interviewed. Data analysis was induction and data reduction theory. The results of the Adversity Quotient scale questionnaire showed that there were 6 students (26%) with the quitter type, 14 students (61%) with the camper type, and 3 students (13%) with the climber type. The test results showed that there were 8 students (35%) with high abilities, 11 students (48%) with moderate abilities, and 4 students (17%) with low abilities. The analysis showed that the fluency criteria of students with the quitter type meet three problem-solving indicators. The students with flexibility criteria in the camper type met all problem-solving indicators but lacked detail. Meanwhile, the students with originality criteria in the climber type could fulfill all problem-solving indicators in detail.

show abstract

Mathematics Problem Solving Based on Cognitive Style to Determine of Student Reasoning Abilities in the Covid-19 Pandemic Era

Cited by 3 publications

References 18 publications

Students’ Covariational Reasoning Reviewed From Cognitive Styles

Students’ Covariational Reasoning Reviewed From Cognitive Styles

Analysis of Algebra Communication Skills and Creative Thinking Skill Levels: In Terms of Cognitive Style

Analysis of Mathematical Creative Thinking Ability in Problem-Solving in Terms of Adversity Quotient

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About