STUDENTS’ ERROR IN STATISTICAL PROBLEMS SOLVING BASED ON THE ONTO-SEMIOTIC APPROACH
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v7i10.3315Keywords:
students’ error, statistics problem, onto-semiotic approach, understandingAbstract
Understanding is one of the aims of mathematics learning, though there are still many students who do not understand the material that they were studying. It indicates that there is a mistake they do in solving mathematics problems. Therefore, it is necessary to identify the types of errors made by students in solving mathematics problems in order to advance solutions. One of the approaches that can be used to identify the types of errors is the onto-semiotic, which is able to notice the meaning of mathematics object consists of language, concept, procedure, computation, proposition, and argument. The population in this study were students of STKIP PGRI Tulungagung, Indonesia. While the sample was students of the mathematic education study program. Data was collected through tasks and interviews. Data were analyzed by means of data reduction, data presentation, and conclusion drawing. The result showed that students’ error in solving the statistics problem based on onto-semiotic include an aspect of language (incorrect use of terms), concept aspects (incorrectly defining terms, incorrect example), procedural aspect (incorrect use of strategy), computational aspect (incorrect grouping), the proposition aspect (making false statement), and the argument aspect (wrong explanation of each answer). The mistake starts with the misunderstanding of the problem given because of the dominant error in terms of the concept aspect. Researchers recommend that the onto-semiotic approach is a solution for teachers and practitioners to anticipate the types of errors and how to deal with these errors during learning.
Article visualizations:
References
Afifah, D. S. N. (2016). Onto semiotic approach profile of senior high school student based on cognitive style in solving statistics problem. In International Conference on Mathematics, Science, and Education. Semarang: UNNES.
Alias, M. (2009). Integrating Technology into Classroom Instructions for Reduced Misconceptions in Statistics. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 4(2), 77–91.
Almog, N., & Ilany, B. S. (2012). Absolute value inequalities: High school students’ solutions and misconceptions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 81(3), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9404-z
Amalia, S. R. (2017). Error Analysis based on Newman’s procedure in solving story problems in terms of students’ cognitive style. AKSIOMA, 8(1), 17–30.
De Zeeuw, A., Craig, T., & You, H. S. (2013). Assessing conceptual understanding in mathematics. Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE, (October 2013), 742–744. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2013.6685135
Dewanti, S. S. (2013). Misconception Analysis of Mathematics Education Study Program Students in Calculus I Subjects Viewed from Learning Styles. Yogyakarta: Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Kalijaga.
Font, V., Godino, J., & Gallardo, J. (2013). The emergence of objects from mathematical practices. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82, 97–124.
Godino, J., & Batanero, C. (2013). The meanings of mathematical objects as analysis units for didactic of mathematics’. European Research in Mathematics Education III, 236–248.
Godino, J., Batanero, C., & Font, V. (2007). The onto-semiotic approach to research in mathematics education. ZDM Mathematics Education, 39(1–2), 127–135. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-006-0004-1.
Godino, J., Batanero, C., & Rafael, R. (2015). An onto-semiotic analysis of combinatorial problems and the solving processes by university students. Educational Studies in Mathematics.
Montiel, A. (2009). The effect of structured mentoring on enrollment and success rates of a cohort of education paraprofesionals. College and University, 84(3), 26.
NCTM. (2006). Principles and standard for school mathematics (VA). Reaston: NCTM.
Neto, T. B. (2012). Design and analysis of mathematical tasks using the onto-semiotic approach. In 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education Program. Seoul: COEX.
Roa, R. (2005). Combinatorial reasoning in students with advanced mathematical training. University of Granada, Spain.
Safaat, N. H., & Sari, O. (2016). Rancangan Bangun Aplikasi Pembelajaran Bahasa Inggris Berbasis Kinect. Jurnal CoreIT, 2(1), 21–28.
Sari, F., Sa’dijah, C., Nengah, P., & Rahardjo, S. (2019). Looking without seeing: The role of meta-cognitive blindness of student with high math anxiety. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 7(2), 53–65. https://doi.org/10.5937/ijcrsee1902053f
Üzel, D. (2018). Investigation of Misconceptions and Errors about Division Operation in Fractions. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(11), 2656–2662. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2018.061131
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
