Type of Error in Completing Mathematical Problem Based on Newman’s Error Analysis (Nea) and Polya Theory

Abstract

This study disscusses student’s errors in completing mathematical problems based on Newman’s Errror Analysis and Polya Theory. The study uses a qualitative descriptive approach. The subject of this study are 78 students of Madrasah Aliyah Negeri (MAN) 2 Cirebon. The study uses tests and interviews as data collection techniques. Students take a test to determine their mathematical ability, and the test uses sequence and series as subjects. There are 3 phases in collecting data: data reduction, data presentation, and conclusion. Outline of Error analysis is created using five types of student mathematical error of Newman's Error Analysis and four types of student mathematical error of Polya Theory. The study results based on Newman's Error Analysis are errors reading by 1%, error understanding by 0%, error transforms by 3%, error processing ability by 5%, and error encoding by 7%. As the result of the study based Polya theory, errors when understanding the problem by 31%, errors when devising a plan by 11%, errors when carrying out the plan by 9%, and errors when Looking back by 33%. The result of the interview shows that the error occurs when students don’t do calculations carefully, don’t learn the formula, and cannot distinguish between sequence and series. Students also have a lack of understanding when completing the problem about compound interest.

Measuring the Difficulty Level of Mathematical Problems Based on Polya Criteria

“…This is in line with the research. The arithmetic sequence and series material state the category of Understanding the problem by 31%, Devising a plan 11%, Carrying out the plan 9%, and looking back 33%, and geometry focus areas with each category understanding the problem by 41%, devising a plan 42%, carrying out the plan 36%, and looking back 45% with an average error of 0.41 or 41% (Winarso et al, 2022). This is in line with the research with understanding the problem at 39.6%, Devising a plan 33%, carrying out the plan 19.8%, and looking back 46.2%, these two fields have the largest average compared to algebra focus areas of only 0.3 or 3% with each category of error understanding the problem by 31%, devising a plan 22%, carrying out the plan 30%, and looking back 37% (Jana, 2018).…”

Mathematical Problem Solving Ability to Develop Numerical Literacy in Elementary School Students

“…Mathematics learning can provide literacy and numeracy-based questions with various types of problems such as story questions (Winarso et al, 2022). The following is a table that describes the various problem solving abilities of fifth grade students at SD Negeri Sibela Timur, Surakarta City.…”