Characteristics of Students’ Metacognition Process At Informal Deduction Thinking Level in Geometry Problems

Ahmad Rofii, Sunardi Sunardi, Muhtadi Irvan

Abstract


This study aims to determine the characteristics of students’ metacognition process at the level of informal deduction thinking in solving geometry problems. This research is a qualitative descriptive research. 66 elementary students were tested about their thinking ability of Van Hiele geometry by dividing them into some groups according to their geometry thinking level. The informal deductive thinking level group was tested for problem-solving geometry. Furthermore, interviews were conducted to explore the characteristics of their metacognition process. Based on the data analysis, the characteristics sequence of the metacognition process is complete through the process of planning, monitoring, and evaluation. The metacognition process indicator appears in each problem-solving component, from understanding the problem, preparing a problem-solving plan, implementing a problem-solving plan to check the solutions obtained.

Keywords


Metacognition; Informal deduction; Geometry problem

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abdullah, A.H., & Zakaria, E. (2013). Enhancing Students’ Level of Geometric Thinking through Van Hiele’s Phase-based learning. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 6(5), 4432-4446.

Clements, D.H., & Batitista. (1992). Geometry and Spatial Reasioning. New York: MacMillan Publisher Company.

Crowley, M.L. (1987). The Van Hiele Model of Development of Geometric Though. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. K-12, 1-16.

Duffin, J.M., & Simpson, A.P. (2000). A search for understanding. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 18(4), 415-427.

Foong, P.Y. & Ee, J. (2002). Enhancing the learning of underachievers in mathematics. ASCD Review, 11(2), 25-35.

Haryani, S. (2012). Pengembangan Mahasiswa Model Praktikum Kimia Analitik Instrumen Berbasis Masalah Untuk Meningkatkan Metakognisi Mahasiswa Calon Guru. Doctoral dissertation. Bandung: UPI.

Ikhsan, M. (2008). Meningkatkan Prestasi dan Motivasi Siswa dalam Geometri melalui Pembelajaran Berbasis teori Van Hielle. Doctoral dissertation. Bandung: UPI.

In’am, A. (2012). A metacognitive Approach to Solving Algebra Problem. International Journal of Independent Research and Studies, 1(4), 162-173.

In’am, A. (2016). Euclidean Geometry's Problem-solving Based on Metacognitive in Aspect of Awareness. IEJME-Mathematics Education, 11(4), 961-974.

Kafoussi, S. (2013). Elementary Students’ Spontaneous Metacognitive Function Different Type of Mathematical Problems. Journal Research in Mathematics Education (Online), 2(2), 242-267.

Karan, E.P., & Irizarry, J. (2011). Effects of Metacognitive strategies on Problem Solving Ability in Construction Education. Proceedings of the 50th ASC Annual International Conference, Retrieved from http://www.ascpro.ascweb.org

Kuzle, A. (2011). Pattern of Metacognitive Behavior During Mathematics Problem Solving in a Dynamic Geometry Environment. International Electronic Journal Of Mathematics Education, 8(1), 20-40.

Latifah L.N. (2010). Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Co-Op Co-Op terhadap Peningkatan Berpikir Kritis dan Ketuntasan Belajar Matematika Siswa SMA Bandung. Doctoral Dissertation. Bandung: UPI.

Livingstone, J.L. (1997). Metacognition: An Overview (On Line), Retrieved from http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/fas

Matlin, M. (1998). Cognition. Philadelphia: Harcourt Brace College Publisher.

Mayberry, J. (1983). The van Hiele Levels of Geometric Thought in Undegraduate Preservice Teacher. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14(1), 58-69.

Panaoura, A. (2009). An Intervention to the Metacognitive Performance: Self-Regulation In Mathematics and Mathematical Modeling. Acta Didactica Universitatis Comenianae Mathematics (online), 9, 63-79.

Pierce, W. (2003). Metacognition: Study strategies, monitoring and motivating. A workshop paper presented at Prince George’s Community College. Retrieved from http://academic.pg.cc.md.us

Polya. (1973). How to solve it. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Purnomo, D., Nusantara, T., Subanji, & Rahardjo, S. (2016). Metacognition Process Characteristics of the Students in Solving Mathematics Problems. IOSR Journal of Research and Education (IOSR-JRME), 6(5), 26-35.

Purnomo, D., Nusantara, T., Subanji, & Rahardjo, S. (2017). The Characteristic of the Process of Students’ Metacognition in Solving Calculus Problems. International Education Studies, 10(5), 13-25.

Schoenfeld, A. (1992). Hand Book of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning. New York: Mc Millan Co.

Suherman, E. (2001). Strategi Pembelajaran Matematika Kontemporer. Bandung: JICA-Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Weldana, H.N. (2014). Gender Position and High School Student’s attainment in Local Geometry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(6), 1331–1354

Wilson, J., & Clarke, D. (2004). Toward the Modelling of Mathematical Metacognition. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 16(2), 25-48.

Woolfolk, A. (2008). Educational Psychology (9th ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Yeo, J.K.K. (2004). An exploratory study of secondary two students’ mathematics anxiety and mathematical problem solving. Doctoral Dissertation. Singapore: National Institute of Education.

Zainal, Z., & Tajudin, N.M. (2013). Metacognitif process in Solving non-routine Mathematics Problems. Retrieved from http://www.psmm.upsi.edu.my.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12928/ijeme.v2i1.7684

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2017 Ahmad Rofii

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

International Journal on Emerging Mathematics Education
Kampus 2 Universitas Ahmad Dahlan
Jalan Pramuka No. 42, Pandeyan, Umbulharjo, Yogyakarta - 55161
Telp. (0274) 563515, ext. 4902; Fax. (0274) 564604
Email: ijeme@uad.ac.id

p-ISSN: 2549-4996 | e-ISSN: 2548-5806

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

View IJEME's Stats