The arguments of mathematics education students to solve proof problems

This study aims to describe the types of arguments in solving proof problems for the students of Mathematic Education Study Program in Pamane Talino College of Education who obtained high, medium, and low academic achievement. This research was qualitative research. The subject was 9 students in the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Winata, R., Friantini, R. N., Annurwanda, P., Annur, M. F., Permata, J. I.
Format: Tagungsbericht
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 1
container_start_page
container_title
container_volume 2268
creator Winata, R.
Friantini, R. N.
Annurwanda, P.
Annur, M. F.
Permata, J. I.
description This study aims to describe the types of arguments in solving proof problems for the students of Mathematic Education Study Program in Pamane Talino College of Education who obtained high, medium, and low academic achievement. This research was qualitative research. The subject was 9 students in the second semester by 3 students for each category. The subject was selected by purposive sampling. Data was gained by test and interview; also data validity used triangulation method. The technique in analyzing data was by: 1) grouping data in 4 steps by Polya; they are a) understanding the problem, b) devising a plan, c) carrying out the plan and d) looking back, then reducing data which not include into those 4 steps; 2) presenting data narratively ; 3) concluding types of argument gained from the steps of solving problem. The result of high academic achievement students shows that the students understand the problem and plan the solution well, the process of proofing is correct and the result is also as proven since they review the process of proofing, yet they haven't provided the conclusion. Type of argument for high academic achievement students is P1 which is the last part of the proof is missing. For the medium academic achievement students is that they understand the problem given, plan the solution well based on the concept, but they still make mistake in mechanics in process of proofing so that they review their answers. Type of argument for medium academic achievement students is P5 in which the solution follows a correct deductive argument but some mistakes in the calculations occur. Then for the low academic achievement students, they couldn't understand the problem; they plan the solution, but they don't understand the concept, so the solving is still wrong; they haven't been able to do the process of proofing and review the answers. Type of argument for low academic achievement students is M5 in which some mathematical statement is presented but this is unrelated to the proof requested.
doi_str_mv 10.1063/5.0026049
format Conference Proceeding
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_scita</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_scitation_primary_10_1063_5_0026049</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2443702748</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p168t-1efe3dc3b32692ddfdfb76738356390827a8bf2b43ddd845984ace369883d0393</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE9LAzEQxYMoWKsHv0HAm7A1yWTz5yhFq1DwUsFb2N0kdku3WTfZgt_e2Ba8eXkzh9_M4z2EbimZUSLgoZwRwgTh-gxNaFnSQgoqztGEEM0LxuHjEl3FuMmQllJN0GK1drgaPsfO7VLEweOuSmuXpW0idnZs8hZ2OKbRHogUcAzbvcP9EDKdtd66Ll6jC19to7s5zSl6f35azV-K5dvidf64LHoqVCqo8w5sAzUwoZm13vpaCgkKSgGaKCYrVXtWc7DWKl5qxavGgdBKgSWgYYrujn-z8dfoYjKbMA67bGkY5yAJk1xl6v5IxaZNhwCmH9quGr7NPgymNKeSTG_9fzAl5rfVvwP4AZjUaUY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype><pqid>2443702748</pqid></control><display><type>conference_proceeding</type><title>The arguments of mathematics education students to solve proof problems</title><source>AIP Journals Complete</source><creator>Winata, R. ; Friantini, R. N. ; Annurwanda, P. ; Annur, M. F. ; Permata, J. I.</creator><contributor>Noviani, Evi ; Kusnandar, Dadan ; Yundari, Yundari</contributor><creatorcontrib>Winata, R. ; Friantini, R. N. ; Annurwanda, P. ; Annur, M. F. ; Permata, J. I. ; Noviani, Evi ; Kusnandar, Dadan ; Yundari, Yundari</creatorcontrib><description>This study aims to describe the types of arguments in solving proof problems for the students of Mathematic Education Study Program in Pamane Talino College of Education who obtained high, medium, and low academic achievement. This research was qualitative research. The subject was 9 students in the second semester by 3 students for each category. The subject was selected by purposive sampling. Data was gained by test and interview; also data validity used triangulation method. The technique in analyzing data was by: 1) grouping data in 4 steps by Polya; they are a) understanding the problem, b) devising a plan, c) carrying out the plan and d) looking back, then reducing data which not include into those 4 steps; 2) presenting data narratively ; 3) concluding types of argument gained from the steps of solving problem. The result of high academic achievement students shows that the students understand the problem and plan the solution well, the process of proofing is correct and the result is also as proven since they review the process of proofing, yet they haven't provided the conclusion. Type of argument for high academic achievement students is P1 which is the last part of the proof is missing. For the medium academic achievement students is that they understand the problem given, plan the solution well based on the concept, but they still make mistake in mechanics in process of proofing so that they review their answers. Type of argument for medium academic achievement students is P5 in which the solution follows a correct deductive argument but some mistakes in the calculations occur. Then for the low academic achievement students, they couldn't understand the problem; they plan the solution, but they don't understand the concept, so the solving is still wrong; they haven't been able to do the process of proofing and review the answers. Type of argument for low academic achievement students is M5 in which some mathematical statement is presented but this is unrelated to the proof requested.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0094-243X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1551-7616</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1063/5.0026049</identifier><identifier>CODEN: APCPCS</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Melville: American Institute of Physics</publisher><subject>Academic achievement ; Colleges &amp; universities ; Education ; Proofing ; Students ; Triangulation</subject><ispartof>AIP conference proceedings, 2020, Vol.2268 (1)</ispartof><rights>Author(s)</rights><rights>2020 Author(s). Published by AIP Publishing.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://pubs.aip.org/acp/article-lookup/doi/10.1063/5.0026049$$EHTML$$P50$$Gscitation$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>309,310,314,780,784,789,790,794,4510,23929,23930,25139,27923,27924,76155</link.rule.ids></links><search><contributor>Noviani, Evi</contributor><contributor>Kusnandar, Dadan</contributor><contributor>Yundari, Yundari</contributor><creatorcontrib>Winata, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Friantini, R. N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Annurwanda, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Annur, M. F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Permata, J. I.</creatorcontrib><title>The arguments of mathematics education students to solve proof problems</title><title>AIP conference proceedings</title><description>This study aims to describe the types of arguments in solving proof problems for the students of Mathematic Education Study Program in Pamane Talino College of Education who obtained high, medium, and low academic achievement. This research was qualitative research. The subject was 9 students in the second semester by 3 students for each category. The subject was selected by purposive sampling. Data was gained by test and interview; also data validity used triangulation method. The technique in analyzing data was by: 1) grouping data in 4 steps by Polya; they are a) understanding the problem, b) devising a plan, c) carrying out the plan and d) looking back, then reducing data which not include into those 4 steps; 2) presenting data narratively ; 3) concluding types of argument gained from the steps of solving problem. The result of high academic achievement students shows that the students understand the problem and plan the solution well, the process of proofing is correct and the result is also as proven since they review the process of proofing, yet they haven't provided the conclusion. Type of argument for high academic achievement students is P1 which is the last part of the proof is missing. For the medium academic achievement students is that they understand the problem given, plan the solution well based on the concept, but they still make mistake in mechanics in process of proofing so that they review their answers. Type of argument for medium academic achievement students is P5 in which the solution follows a correct deductive argument but some mistakes in the calculations occur. Then for the low academic achievement students, they couldn't understand the problem; they plan the solution, but they don't understand the concept, so the solving is still wrong; they haven't been able to do the process of proofing and review the answers. Type of argument for low academic achievement students is M5 in which some mathematical statement is presented but this is unrelated to the proof requested.</description><subject>Academic achievement</subject><subject>Colleges &amp; universities</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Proofing</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Triangulation</subject><issn>0094-243X</issn><issn>1551-7616</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>conference_proceeding</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE9LAzEQxYMoWKsHv0HAm7A1yWTz5yhFq1DwUsFb2N0kdku3WTfZgt_e2Ba8eXkzh9_M4z2EbimZUSLgoZwRwgTh-gxNaFnSQgoqztGEEM0LxuHjEl3FuMmQllJN0GK1drgaPsfO7VLEweOuSmuXpW0idnZs8hZ2OKbRHogUcAzbvcP9EDKdtd66Ll6jC19to7s5zSl6f35azV-K5dvidf64LHoqVCqo8w5sAzUwoZm13vpaCgkKSgGaKCYrVXtWc7DWKl5qxavGgdBKgSWgYYrujn-z8dfoYjKbMA67bGkY5yAJk1xl6v5IxaZNhwCmH9quGr7NPgymNKeSTG_9fzAl5rfVvwP4AZjUaUY</recordid><startdate>20200915</startdate><enddate>20200915</enddate><creator>Winata, R.</creator><creator>Friantini, R. N.</creator><creator>Annurwanda, P.</creator><creator>Annur, M. F.</creator><creator>Permata, J. I.</creator><general>American Institute of Physics</general><scope>8FD</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>L7M</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20200915</creationdate><title>The arguments of mathematics education students to solve proof problems</title><author>Winata, R. ; Friantini, R. N. ; Annurwanda, P. ; Annur, M. F. ; Permata, J. I.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p168t-1efe3dc3b32692ddfdfb76738356390827a8bf2b43ddd845984ace369883d0393</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>conference_proceedings</rsrctype><prefilter>conference_proceedings</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Academic achievement</topic><topic>Colleges &amp; universities</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Proofing</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Triangulation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Winata, R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Friantini, R. N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Annurwanda, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Annur, M. F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Permata, J. I.</creatorcontrib><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Winata, R.</au><au>Friantini, R. N.</au><au>Annurwanda, P.</au><au>Annur, M. F.</au><au>Permata, J. I.</au><au>Noviani, Evi</au><au>Kusnandar, Dadan</au><au>Yundari, Yundari</au><format>book</format><genre>proceeding</genre><ristype>CONF</ristype><atitle>The arguments of mathematics education students to solve proof problems</atitle><btitle>AIP conference proceedings</btitle><date>2020-09-15</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>2268</volume><issue>1</issue><issn>0094-243X</issn><eissn>1551-7616</eissn><coden>APCPCS</coden><abstract>This study aims to describe the types of arguments in solving proof problems for the students of Mathematic Education Study Program in Pamane Talino College of Education who obtained high, medium, and low academic achievement. This research was qualitative research. The subject was 9 students in the second semester by 3 students for each category. The subject was selected by purposive sampling. Data was gained by test and interview; also data validity used triangulation method. The technique in analyzing data was by: 1) grouping data in 4 steps by Polya; they are a) understanding the problem, b) devising a plan, c) carrying out the plan and d) looking back, then reducing data which not include into those 4 steps; 2) presenting data narratively ; 3) concluding types of argument gained from the steps of solving problem. The result of high academic achievement students shows that the students understand the problem and plan the solution well, the process of proofing is correct and the result is also as proven since they review the process of proofing, yet they haven't provided the conclusion. Type of argument for high academic achievement students is P1 which is the last part of the proof is missing. For the medium academic achievement students is that they understand the problem given, plan the solution well based on the concept, but they still make mistake in mechanics in process of proofing so that they review their answers. Type of argument for medium academic achievement students is P5 in which the solution follows a correct deductive argument but some mistakes in the calculations occur. Then for the low academic achievement students, they couldn't understand the problem; they plan the solution, but they don't understand the concept, so the solving is still wrong; they haven't been able to do the process of proofing and review the answers. Type of argument for low academic achievement students is M5 in which some mathematical statement is presented but this is unrelated to the proof requested.</abstract><cop>Melville</cop><pub>American Institute of Physics</pub><doi>10.1063/5.0026049</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0094-243X
ispartof AIP conference proceedings, 2020, Vol.2268 (1)
issn 0094-243X
1551-7616
language eng
recordid cdi_scitation_primary_10_1063_5_0026049
source AIP Journals Complete
subjects Academic achievement
Colleges & universities
Education
Proofing
Students
Triangulation
title The arguments of mathematics education students to solve proof problems
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T19%3A32%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_scita&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=proceeding&rft.atitle=The%20arguments%20of%20mathematics%20education%20students%20to%20solve%20proof%20problems&rft.btitle=AIP%20conference%20proceedings&rft.au=Winata,%20R.&rft.date=2020-09-15&rft.volume=2268&rft.issue=1&rft.issn=0094-243X&rft.eissn=1551-7616&rft.coden=APCPCS&rft_id=info:doi/10.1063/5.0026049&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_scita%3E2443702748%3C/proquest_scita%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2443702748&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true