Students' mathematical argumentation ability when proving mathematical statements based on self-efficacy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29408/jel.v9i2.15151Keywords:
mathematical argumentation, mathematical proof, number theory, proving self-efficacyAbstract
Argumentation as an aspect of problem-solving has been studied in mathematics education. However, mathematical proof still needs to be resolved further. This study investigates students' mathematical argumentation skills when proving mathematical statements based on their self-efficacy. The research subjects were 43 mathematics education students at a university in Aceh Province who had taken a number theory course. The study used a qualitative approach with a case study design: students’ mathematical proving self-efficacy. Data was obtained using self-efficacy questionnaires and mathematical proof test instruments that experts have validated, while the data triangulation used was an in-depth interview. The results of this study reveal that students' mathematical argumentation skills in proving mathematical statements have differences based on their self-efficacy. The mathematical argumentation ability of students with high self-efficacy involves all aspects of argumentation well so that the construction of the proof is scientifically correct. Meanwhile, the argumentation ability of students with moderate or low self-efficacy still does not involve essential aspects of argumentation. So, the proof results are not scientifically correct because they have not arrived at the proper conclusion.References
Aberdein, A., & Dove, I. J. (2013). The Argument of Mathematics (A. Aberdein & I. J. Dove (eds.)). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6534-4
Alcock, L., & Weber, K. (2010). Undergraduates’ example use in proof construction: purposes and effectiveness. Investigations in Mathematics Learning, 3(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/24727466.2010.11790298
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
Budiyono. (2015). Pengantar penilaian hasil belajar [Introduction to assessment of learning outcomes]. UNS Press.
Dede, A. T. (2019). Arguments constructed within the mathematical modelling cycle. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 50(2), 292–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1501825
Fernández-León, A., Gavilán-Izquierdo, J. M., & Toscano, R. (2021). A case study of the practices of conjecturing and proving of research mathematicians. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 52(5), 767–781. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1717658
Fukawa-Connelly, T. (2016). Responsibility for proving and defining in abstract algebra class. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 47(5), 733–749. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2015.1114159
Fukawa-Connelly, T., & Silverman, J. (2015). The development of mathematical argumentation in an unmoderated, asynchronous multi-user dynamic geometry environment. Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher Education, 15, 445–488.
Gutiérrez, Á., Leder, G. C., & Boero, P. (2016). The Second Handbook of Research on the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-561-6
Hamdani, D., & Subarinah, S. (2020). Argumen deduktif mahasiswa dalam mengonstruksi bukti [Students’ deductive arguments in constructing evidence]. The 2th National Conference on Education, Social Science, and Humaniora Proceeding, 2(1), 21–32.
Indrawatiningsih, N., Purwanto, As’ari, A. R., & Sa’dijah, C. (2020). Mathematical argumentation ability: Error analysis in solving mathematical arguments. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 8(2), 711–721. https://doi.org/10.17478/jegys.654460
Kwon, O. N., Bae, Y., & Oh, K. H. (2015). Design research on inquiry-based multivariable calculus: focusing on students’ argumentation and instructional design. ZDM, 47(6), 997–1011. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0726-z
Laamena, C. M., Nusantara, T., Irawan, E. B., & Muksar, M. (2018). How do the undergraduate students use an example in mathematical proof construction: A study based on argumentation and proving activity. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 13(3), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.12973/iejme/3836
Lesseig, K., & Hine, G. (2022). Teaching mathematical proof at secondary school: an exploration of pre-service teachers’ situative beliefs. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(9), 2465–2481. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2021.1895338
Maslahah, Ni’matul, F., Abadi, A., & Maman, A. (2019). Analisis kemampuan pembuktian, kemampuan berpikir kreatif dan self-efficacy mahasiswa pendidikan matematika pada mata kuliah aljabar abstrak di yogyakarta [Analysis of proving ability, creative thinking ability and self-efficacy of mathematics educations. Tesis pada Jurusan Pendidikan Matematika, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta.
NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. NCTM.
Sadieda, L. U. (2019). Kemampuan argumentasi mahasiswa melalui model berpikir induktif dengan metode probing-prompting learning [Students’ argumentation skills through inductive thinking models with the probing-prompting learning method]. Pythagoras: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 14(1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.21831/pg.v14i1.24038
Sears, R. (2019). Proof schemes of pre-service middle and secondary mathematics teachers. Investigations in Mathematics Learning, 11(4), 258–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/19477503.2018.1467106
Septiati, E. (2021). Kemampuan mahasiswa dalam mengkonstruksi bukti matematis pada mata kuliah analisis real [Students’ ability to construct mathematical evidence in real analysis courses]. Indiktika : Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Matematika, 4(1), 64–72. https://doi.org/10.31851/indiktika.v4i1.6761
Sriraman, B., & Umland, K. (2020). Argumentation in mathematicseducation. In Encyclopedia of mathematics education (pp. 63–66). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15789-0_11
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Philosophy, 34(130).
Viholainen, A., Tossavainen, T., Viitala, H., & Johansson, M. (2019). University mathematics students’ self-efficacy beliefs about proof and proving. Lumat: International Journal of Math, Science and Technology Education, 7(1), 148–164. https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.7.1.406
Voica, C., Singer, F. M., & Stan, E. (2020). How are motivation and self-efficacy interacting in problem-solving and problem-posing? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 105(3), 487–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-10005-0
Zambak, V. S., & Magiera, M. T. (2020). Supporting grades 1–8 pre-service teachers’ argumentation skills: constructing mathematical arguments in situations that facilitate analyzing cases. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 51(8), 1196–1223. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1762938
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with the Jurnal Elemen agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0).
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the 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 acknowledgment 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.
Jurnal Elemen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
