Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 0 Download : 2

Main Article Content

Abstract

Students’ lack of mathematical literacy skills is also accompanied by the lack of mathematical literacy skills of most pre-service teachers. The purpose of this study is to investigate the decision-making process conducted by pre-service teachers in solving mathematical literacy problems. This qualitative descriptive study involved two subjects taken from 42 pre-service mathematics teacher students. Each subject was identified based on their pattern in solving mathematical literacy problems correctly and inappropriately. Data were collected through tests of mathematical literacy problems and test-based interviews. The results showed that there were differences in the decision-making process done by the students with correct and incorrect problem solving, namely: (1) building ideas, having three vs. two solution ideas, formulating and employing correctly vs. formulating correctly and employing inappropriately; (2) clarifying ideas, giving reasons for each idea vs. having wrong reasons due to calculation errors, interpreting correctly vs. interpreting incorrectly; and (3) assessing the reasonableness of an idea, providing logical reasons with one choice vs. logical reasons with one choice but less sure. Based on the findings, it can be concluded that the creativity of prospective teacher students in building ideas is still low and reasoning in expressing and choosing ideas is still weak, causing immature decision making. The finding of this study provides suggestions for educators to provide structured assignments and for other researchers to find factors influencing pre-service teachers’ decision-making in mathematics problem-solving to improve pre-service teachers’ decision-making skills.


DOI: https://doi.org/10.22342/jpm.15.2.13908.145-160

Keywords

Decision Making Mathematical Literacy Problem Solving

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2021 Wasilatul Murtafiah, Marheny Lukitasari, Nurcholif Diah Sri Lestari

Creative Commons License

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

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA).

How to Cite
Murtafiah, W., Lukitasari, M., & Lestari, N. D. S. (2021). Exploring the Decision-Making Process of Pre-Service Teachers in Solving Mathematics Literacy Problems. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 15(2), 145–160. Retrieved from https://jpm.ejournal.unsri.ac.id/index.php/jpm/article/view/233
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. AACTE & Partnetship For 21st Century Skill. (2010). 21St century knowledge and skills in educator preparation. Blackboard, ETS, Intel, National Education Association, Microsoft and Pearson. America. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264193864-en
  2. Abdillah, Nusantara, T., Subanji, Susanto, H., & Abadyo. (2016). The students decision making in solving discount problem. International Education Studies, 9(7), 57–63. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n7p57
  3. Apriandi, D., Murtafiah, W., Ayuningtyas, A. D., & Rudyanto, H. E. (2020). Solving shortest path problems using mathematical literacy skill figured out by pre-service teachers. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1613(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1613/1/012016
  4. Damayanti, N. K. A., Suarsana, I. M., & I Putu Pasek Suryawan. (2017). Improving students' mathematical literacy ability through the application of collaborative learning model [in Bahasa]. Wahana Matematika dan Sains: Jurnal Matematika, Sains, Dan Pembelajarannya, 11(1), 33–42. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.23887/wms.v11i1.11845
  5. Dianty, A. P., Supeno, & Astutik, S. (2020). Decision making ability of high school students in guided inquiry learning [in Bahasa]. Jurnal Pembelajaran Fisika, 9(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.19184/jpf.v9i1.17935
  6. Griffith, R., & Groulx, J. (2014). Profile for teacher decision making: A closer look at beliefs and practice. Journal of Research in Education, 24(2), 103–115.
  7. Güler, H. K., & Çiğdem Arslan. (2019). Mathematical competencies required by mathematical literacy problems. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 7(2), 57–70.
  8. Khoirudin, A., Dwi Styawati, R., & Nursyahida, F. (2017). Profile of mathematical literacy ability of students with low mathematical ability in solving problems in the form of PISA [in Bahasa]. Aksioma, 8(2), 33. https://doi.org/10.26877/aks.v8i2.1839
  9. Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., Wong, B., & Hong, H.-Y. (2015). Design thinking for education: conceptions and applications in teaching and learning. New York: Springer.
  10. Kosko, K. W. (2016). Preservice elementary mathematics teachers decision making: The questions they ask and the tasks they select. Proceedings of the 38th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Pyschology of Mathematics Education (pp. 1341–1344).
  11. Lange, J. De. (2006). Mathematical literacy for living from OECD-PISA perspective. Tsukuba Journal of Educational Study in Mathematics, 25, 13–35.
  12. Lestari, N. D. S., Juniati, D., & Suwarsono., S. (2019). The role of prospective mathematics teachers’ knowledge of content and students in integrating mathematical literacy. New Educational Review, 57. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2019.57.3.12
  13. Lestari, N. D. S., Juniati, D., & Suwarsono, S. (2018). Gender Differences in prospective teachers’ mathematical literacy: problem solving of occupational context on shipping company. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1008(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1008/1/012074
  14. Miles, M., Huberman, M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis. european journal of science education (Vol. 1). https://doi.org/10.1080/0140528790010406
  15. Ministry of Education and Culture. (2020). National Assessment and Program for International Student Assessment [in Bahasa]. Jakarta.
  16. Muhtarom, Juniati, D., & Siswono, T. Y. E. (2017). Exploring beliefs in a problem-solving process of prospective teachers’ with high mathematical ability. Global Journal of Engineering Education, 19(2), 130–136.
  17. Murtafiah, W., Sa’dijah, C., Chandra, T. D., & Susiswo, S. (2019). Decision making of the winner of the national student creativity program in designing ICT-based learning media. TEM Journal, 8(3), 1039–1045. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM83-49
  18. Murtafiah, W., Sa’dijah, C., Chandra, T. D., Susiswo, & Zayyadi, M. (2020). Novice and experienced mathematics teachers’ decision making process in designing math problem. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1464(012030), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1464/1/012030
  19. OECD. (2010). PISA 2012 mathematical framework. Paris: OECD Publishing.
  20. OECD. (2013). PISA 2012 assessment and analytical framework: Mathematics, reading, science, problem solving and financial literacy. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264190511-en
  21. OECD. (2015). PISA 2015 results (Volume I) (Vol. I).
  22. OECD. (2018). Pisa 2015 results in Focus. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa
  23. Ojose, B. (2011). Mathematics literacy : Are we able to put the mathematics we learn into everyday use?. Journal of Mathematics Education, 4(1), 89–100.
  24. Ontario Ministry of Education. (2016). 21st century competencies. Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.
  25. Sa’dijah, C., Murtafiah, W., Anwar, L., Nurhakiki, R., Tejo, E., & Cahyowati, D. (2021). Teaching higher-order thinking skills in mathematics classrooms: Gender differences. Journal on Mathematics Education, 12(1), 159–180. https://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.22342/jme.12.1.13087.159-180
  26. Swartz, R. J., Fischer, S. D., & Parks, S. (1998). Infusing the teaching of critical and creative thinking into secondary science: A lesson design handbook. New Jersey: Critical Thinking Books & Software.
  27. Swartz, R., & Reagan, R. (1998). Infusing critical and creative thinking into content instruction. Washington: The National Center for Teaching Thinking.
  28. Wang, Y., & Ruhe, G. (2007). The cognitive process of decision making. Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence, 1(June), 73–85. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/jcini.2007040105.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.