Prospective mathematics teachers’ argumentation structure when constructing a mathematical proof: The importance of backing

Laamena, Christina M; Nusantara, Toto

doi:10.20414/betajtm.v12i1.272

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Whereas women are able to implement a plan and reexamine even if lacking. [23] If argumentation comes to an end when teacher or students reach the final claim to be achieved, then they called it as terminator guide backing. However, if argumentation occurs individually to solve one problem or proving a mathematical statement, the backing that comes from students becomes very important.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive Proficiency Analysis of Adventist High School Students Tenth-Grade Aliciously Solve Linear Equations System of Two Variables Reviewed of Gender

Yesaya¹,

Mataheru²,

Laamena³

2021

Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognitive ability in this research, are steps that students do in solving problems that deal with problem solving. Cognitive abilities seen from the cognitive level of remembering (C1), understanding (C2), applying (C3), analyzing (C4). The study aims to describe a student's cognitive capability in gender problem solving. The study is a qualitative descriptive study that describes the student's cognitive capability in problem solving two variables of linear equations in relation to the female and male gender. The subject in this study is an four students with details of each of the two students of the female gender who have high and low cognitive abilities, and two students of the male gender with high and low cognitive abilities. The data-mining techniques used are problem solving and interview tests. From data analysis it is obtained that students' cognitive capability in problem solving on female gender with high cognitive capability from C1 to C4, whereas on female gender low cognitive capability from C1 to C3, the male gender high-cognitive capability from C1 to C4, whereas the male gender has high cognitive capability from C1 to C4, Whereas the male gender has high cognitive capability from levels C1 through C2.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive Proficiency Analysis of Adventist High School Students Tenth-Grade Aliciously Solve Linear Equations System of Two Variables Reviewed of Gender

Yesaya¹,

Mataheru²,

Laamena³

2021

Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Good backing preparation can be helped by maximum material mastery, the use of learning resources, and the learning process in the classroom. Backing plays an important role in strengthening warrants, finding ruckles, and qualifying claims (Laamena & Nusantara, 2019).…”

Section: Findings and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Profile of High School Students' Arguments on Environmental Pollution Materials in the Covid-19 Era

Puspitasari

Ariyanto

Widoretno

et al. 2022

AIJP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study aims to identify the argumentation profile of high school students in learning in the covid-19 era. This research is quantitative descriptive with a survey method. The research population was 172 students, with a sample of 72 students. Determination of the sample using cluster random sampling technique has a balanced quality from the results of the paired F test. The research procedure was carried out by collecting data on student answers from argumentative essay questions distributed via a google form. Argumentative questions based on TAP contain six components, namely Evidence (E), Warrant (W), Backing (B), Qualifier (Q), Rebuttal (R), and Claim (C). The argumentation scoring rubric is calculated based on the Patton-Pickle rule. Data analysis was carried out by interpreting the scores obtained by students on each argumentation component that showed the argumentation profile. Most of the students' argumentation profiles, according to their components, are in the very low category scores, namely 0.5 and 1. A score of 0.5 is obtained by comparing the percentages of students: E: E: W: W: B: Q: R: C: C: C by 23.61%: 1.39%: 0.00%: 52.78%: 45.83%: 83.33 %: 4.17%: 2.78%: 2.78%: 0.00% while the score of 1 is 41.67%: 55.56%: 83.33%: 47.22%: 54.17%: 8.33%: 75.00%: 83.33%: 79.17%: 98 ,61%. Scores were obtained due to various factors, including the learning process that was less meaningful, students' understanding and reasoning of the material was not in-depth, the generalization process of evidence or theory was not appropriate.

show abstract

“…Laamena, Nusantara, Irawan, and Muksar (2018) mention that students are able to solve problems involving numbers (inductively) but if they are faced with problems that require deductive reasoning then they will have difficulty. So according to Laamena and Nusantara (2019), if the problem is presented in a statement, students tend to use examples of numbers to test the truth of the statement (Numerical backing).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mathematical Literacy Ability and Metacognitive Characteristics of Mathematics Pre-Service Teacher

Laamena

Laurens

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to determine the characteristics of students' metacognition in solving mathematical literacy problems. The metacognitive traits explored are related to awareness in planning, monitoring, and evaluating the design of the thinking process used. The research method used is a mixed-method (sequential explanatory), which uses quantitative research results to conduct qualitative research. The research subjects were 80 early semester students who took the literacy test and chose six respondents representing the upper, middle, and lower groups, with two people in each group to be interviewed. The results showed that the mathematical literacy skills of prospective teachers were at a low level. Metacognitive characteristics that appear in the low group are (1) realizing that the solution of strategy is not right but not improved; (2) planning to develop a settlement strategy, but are not sure, (3) do not carry out the re-check process, and (4) do not believe what is being thought and do not understand the concept. Metacognitive traits in the middle group are (1) aware of what they are thinking, (2) consciously plan various strategies to improve thinking accuracy, but do not always use these strategies, (3) tend to monitor the thinking process, and (4) show tendency to master the basic mathematical concepts of the problems at hand.The characteristics of metacognition in the high group during problem-solving are (1) Using various strategies to demonstrate or improve the accuracy of thinking (sketching, drawing), (2) Analyzing the problem before solving it, and (3)Understanding and mastering the mathematical concepts that underlie the problem which is given.

show abstract

Prospective mathematics teachers’ argumentation structure when constructing a mathematical proof: The importance of backing

Cited by 3 publications

References 18 publications

Cognitive Proficiency Analysis of Adventist High School Students Tenth-Grade Aliciously Solve Linear Equations System of Two Variables Reviewed of Gender

Cognitive Proficiency Analysis of Adventist High School Students Tenth-Grade Aliciously Solve Linear Equations System of Two Variables Reviewed of Gender

Profile of High School Students' Arguments on Environmental Pollution Materials in the Covid-19 Era

Mathematical Literacy Ability and Metacognitive Characteristics of Mathematics Pre-Service Teacher

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About