Misconceptions Analysis of Students' Reflective-Impulsive Cognitive Style on Function Material

Aas Uswatun Hasanah; Arif Muchyidin; Budi Manfaat

doi:10.58421/misro.v2i3.192

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58421/misro.v2i3.192

Authors

Aas Uswatun Hasanah IAIN Syekh Nurjati Cirebon
Arif Muchyidin IAIN Syekh Nurjati Cirebon https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1598-6928
Budi Manfaat IAIN Syekh Nurjati Cirebon

Keywords:

Conceptual error, Four-tier diagnostic test, Matching Familiar Figure Test, Misconception, Reflective-impulsive

Abstract

Students generally experience errors in two forms, namely conceptual and execution errors. Conceptual errors are related to students' lack of understanding, while execution errors occur when attempting to solve problems with incomplete procedures. This study aims to measure students' understanding of concepts after learning. The misconception analysis in this study used a four-tier diagnostic test. The results of this test provide five categories of student answers, namely understanding concept (understand), incomplete understanding (partial understanding), misconception, not understanding the concept (not understand), and cannot be coded (uncode). This research uses a mixed method. The data analysis phase is carried out by analyzing the data collected as Matching Familiar Figure Test (MFFT), four-tier diagnostic test data results, and in-depth interview data based on the results of the study concluded that in terms of students' reflective-impulsive cognitive style, impulsive students tend to experience higher misconceptions than reflective students.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

K. I. Goldberg et al., “Mathematics for the 21 st Century : What Should Students Learn ?,” Teach. Except. Child., vol. 13, no. October, pp. 1–25, 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.885.

R. Watson, “On Education in the 21st Century,” Education: Future Frontiers, NSW, 2017.

M. M. Champa, “Awakening: The Lived Experience of Creativity as Told by Eight Young Creators,” The University of Toledo, 2016.

S. Bishara, “Creativity in unique problem-solving in mathematics and its influence on motivation for learning,” Cogent Educ., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2016, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2016.1202604.

Kemendiknas, “Permendiknas Nomor 22 Tahun 2006,” Jakarta, 2006.

A. Muchyidin and A. hildan F. Amin, “Pengaruh Penguasaan Teorema Pythagoras Terhadap Kemampuan Siswa Dalam Menyelesaikan Soal-Soal Garis Singgung Lingkaran Kelas Viii Smpn 1 Leuwimunding,” Eduma Math. Educ. Learn. Teach., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 55–62, 2012, doi: 10.24235/eduma.v1i2.298.

R. Istiyani, A. Muchyidin, and H. Raharjo, “Analysis of Student Misconception on Geometry Concepts Using Three-Tier Diagnostic Test,” J. Cakrawala Pendidik., vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 223–236, Jul. 2018, doi: 10.21831/cp.v37i2.14493.

D. Alfiani, A. Muchyidin, and N. Izzati, “Pengaruh Penerapan Model Pembelajaran SSCS (Search, Solve, Create, Share) Terhadap Miskonsepsi Siswa Pada Soal Matematika Bentuk Cerita,” Limacon J. Math. Educ., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 49–58, 2019.

E. T. Ruseffendi, Pengantar kepada Membantu Guru Mengembangkan Kompetensinya dalam Pengajaran Matematika untuk Meningkatkan CBSA. Bandung: Tarsito, 2006.

J. P. Makonye and J. Fakude, “A Study of Errors and Misconceptions in the Learning of Addition and Subtraction of Directed Numbers in Grade 8,” SAGE Open, vol. 6, no. 4, 2016, doi: 10.1177/2158244016671375.

D. Rahmatina and N. M. Zaid, “Students’ misconceptions in interpreting the mean of the data presented in a bar graph,” Int. J. Insights Math. Teach., vol. 02, no. 1, pp. 57–74, 2019.

L. Mishra, “Conception and misconception in teaching arithmetic at primary level,” J. Crit. Rev., vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 936–939, 2020, doi: 10.31838/jcr.07.05.192.

R. Hayati and W. Setyaningrum, “Identification of Misconceptions in Middle School Mathematics Utilizing Certainty of Response Index,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1320, no. 1, 2019, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1320/1/012041.

S. A. Widodo, Turmudi, and J. A. Dahlan, “An error students in mathematical problems solves based on cognitive development,” Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res., vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 433–439, 2019.

E. M. Waluyo, A. Muchyidin, and H. Kusmanto, “Analysis of Students Misconception in Completing Mathematical Questions Using Certainty of Response Index ( CRI ),” Tadris J. Kegur. dan Ilmu Tarb., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 27–39, 2019, doi: 10.24042/tadris.v4i1.2988.

P. M. Sadler and G. Sonnert, “Understanding misconceptions teaching and learning in middle school physical science,” Am. Educ. Spring, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 26–32, 2016, [Online]. Available: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1094278.

A. Ilyas and M. Saeed, “Exploring Teachers’ Understanding about Misconceptions of Secondary Grade Chemistry Students,” Int. J. Cross-Disciplinary Subj. Educ., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 3323–3328, 2018, doi: 10.20533/ijcdse.2042.6364.2018.0444.

T. B. Yates and E. A. Marek, “Teachers teaching misconceptions: A study of factors contributing to high school biology students’ acquisition of biological evolution-related misconceptions,” Evol. Educ. Outreach, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–18, 2014, doi: 10.1186/s12052-014-0007-2.

I. Kartika and A. Muchyidin, “Perbandingan Pemahaman Matematika Siswa Antara Kelas Yang Menggunakan Metode Student Facilitator and Explaining Dengan Metode Peer Teaching Pokok Bahasan Bangun Ruang Sisi Datar,” Eduma Math. Educ. Learn. Teach., vol. 3, no. 2, 2014, doi: 10.24235/eduma.v3i2.57.

Yulianingsih and Sobandi, “Kinerja Mengajar Guru sebagai Faktor Determinan Prestasi Belajar Siswa,” J. Pendidik. Manaj. Perkantoran, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 50, 2017.

S. Provasnik, L. Malley, M. Stephens, K. Landeros, R. Perkins, and J. H. Tang, “Highlights From TIMSS and TIMSS Advanced 2015 Mathematics and Science Achievement of U.S. Students in Grades 4 and 8 and in Advanced Courses at the End of High School in an International Context,” Washington DC, 2016. Accessed: Jan. 09, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2017/2017002.pdf.

H. Nufus and R. Ariawan, “Relationship between Cognitive Style and Habits of Mind,” Malikussaleh J. Math. Learn., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 23–28, 2019, doi: 10.29103/mjml.v2i1.2128.

I. V. Grebenev, L. B. Lozovskaya, and E. O. Morozova, “Methodology of determining student’s cognitive styles and its application for teaching physics,” Springerplus, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2014, doi: 10.1186/2193-1801-3-449.

R. N. F. Jiwa, A. Tanduklangi, and Z. Sailan, “Cognitive Style, Attitude, and Self Efficacy as Predictors of Student Success in EFL Online Courses at Halu Oleo University,” J. Lang. Educ. Educ. Technol., vol. 2, no. 2, 2017.

H. Susanto, Pemahaman Pemecahan Masalah Berdasar Gaya Kognitif. Yogyakarta: deepublish, 2015.

I. H. Ameliah, M. Munawaroh, and A. Muchyidin, “Pengaruh Keingintahuan dan Rasa Percaya Diri Siswa Terhadap Hasil Belajar Matematika Kelas VII MTS Negeri I Kota Cirebon,” Eduma Math. Educ. Learn. Teach. Math. Educ., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 9–21, 2016, doi: 10.24235/eduma.v5i1.598.

Z. Arifin, Membangun Kompetensi Pedagogik Guru Matematika. Surabaya: Lentera Cendekia, 2009.

N. Rahman, A., Minggi, I., & Alifah, “Misconceptions Analysis of Triangel Material based on Cognitive Style,” Universitas Negeri Makassar, 2018.

B. Egeland and R. A. Weinberg, “The Matching Familiar Figures Test: A Look at Its Psychometric Credibility,” Child Dev., vol. 47, no. 2, p. 483, 1976, doi: 10.2307/1128805.

M. Haghighi, M. Ghanavati, and A. Rahimi, “The Role of Gender Differences in the Cognitive Style of Impulsivity/Reflectivity and EFL Success,” Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci., vol. 192, pp. 467–474, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.072.

E. Bobek and B. Tversky, “Creating visual explanations improves learning,” Cogn. Res. Princ. Implic., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2016, doi: 10.1186/s41235-016-0031-6.

S. Podschuweit and S. Bernholt, “Composition-Effects of Context-based Learning Opportunities on Students’ Understanding of Energy,” Res. Sci. Educ., vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 717–752, 2018, doi: 10.1007/s11165-016-9585-z.