Article Sidebar

Published
Jan 31, 2024
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 0 Download : 67

Main Article Content

Abstract

The research aims to analyze the gap between teachers' and students' understanding of language literacy and mathematical symbols. The study was designed with a concurrent triangulation strategy. The research respondents consisted of 20 teachers and 120 class VII students. Data collection through questionnaires, interviews, and cognitive tests. Qualitative data was analyzed descriptively, and quantitative data was analyzed inferentially. The results of the analysis of quantitative data show that there is a linear (significant) relationship between understanding language and mathematical symbols and mathematical literacy skills. The results of the qualitative data analysis describe that the teacher's understanding of language and mathematical symbols (high criterion) does not necessarily support the students' understanding of language and mathematical symbols. We confirm the suspicion that there is a gap in the ability of teachers and students to understand language and mathematical symbols. Students need to improve their understanding of mathematical language and symbols. The pattern of errors is based on the teacher's conception of learning in the previous class, so the process of transitioning the teacher's knowledge to students' understanding of mathematics experiences obstacles. The implication is that the process of transitioning meaning from mathematical symbols to written and spoken language must be carried out when the teacher introduces or teaches new topics to students, and the context in which mathematical symbols are used must be followed by clarification.

Keywords

Mathematical language Mathematical literacy Multi-semiotic system Symbols

Article Details

Creative Commons License

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

References

  1. Amirbostaghi, G., Asadi, M., Mardanbeigi, M. R., Azhini, M., & Shahvarani, A. (2021). The impact of words in mathematics education–Case of‎ symbols. Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers, 12(3), 92-100.

  2. Bardini, C., & Pierce, R. (2015). Assumed mathematics knowledge: The challenge of symbols. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 23(1), 1-9.

  3. Bateman, J. A. (2021). Multisemiotic artifacts between modes and media. Revista signos, 54(107), 842-866. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09342021000300842

  4. Bermejo, V., Ester, P., & Morales, I. (2021). How the language of instruction influences mathematical thinking development in the first years of bilingual schoolers. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 533141. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.533141

  5. Bingham, A. J. (2023). From data management to actionable findings: A five-phase process of qualitative data analysis. International journal of qualitative methods, 22, 16094069231183620. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231183620

  6. Chesney, D. L., McNeil, N. M., Petersen, L. A., & Dunwiddie, A. E. (2018). Arithmetic practice that includes relational words promotes understanding of symbolic equations. Learning and Individual Differences, 64, 104-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.04.013

  7. Chin, K. E., & Pierce, R. (2019). University students’ conceptions of mathematical symbols and expressions. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(9), em1748. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/103736

  8. Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage publications.

  9. Delice, A. (2010). The sampling issues in quantitative research. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 10(4), 2001-2018.

  10. Edo, S. I., & Tasik, W. F. (2022). Investigation of students' algebraic conceptual understanding and the ability to solve PISA-like mathematics problems in a modeling task. Mathematics Teaching Research Journal, 14(2), 44-60.

  11. Esuong, U. U., Owan, V. J., Edoho, E. A., & Eni, B. E. (2023). Mathematics symbol instruction and senior secondary students’ achievement in word problems: A quasi-experimental study. Pedagogical Research, 8(1), em0142. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/12595

  12. Fang, Z., Chapman, S., Kellogg, G. C., & Commeret, M. (2023). Beyond content: exploring the neglected dimensions of mathematics literacy. Journal of World Languages, 9(3), 427-454. https://doi.org/10.1515/jwl-2023-0015

  13. Garnelo, M., & Shanahan, M. (2019). Reconciling deep learning with symbolic artificial intelligence: representing objects and relations. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 29, 17-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.12.010

  14. Godino, J. D., Burgos, M., & Gea, M. M. (2022). Analysing theories of meaning in mathematics education from the onto-semiotic approach. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(10), 2609-2636. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2021.1896042

  15. Gravemeijer, K., Stephan, M., Julie, C., Lin, F.-L., & Ohtani, M. (2017). What mathematics education may prepare students for the society of the future? International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(1), 105-123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9814-6

  16. Hassidov, D., & Ilany, B.-S. (2017). Between natural language and mathematical symbols (<, >, =): The comprehension of pre-service and preschool teachers- perspective of numbers. Creative Education, 8(12), 1903-1911. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2017.812130

  17. Hassidov, D., & Ilany, B.-S. (2020). Comprehending and using the mathematical symbols, from a quantitative perspective amongst preschool and 1st-and 2nd-grade pre-service teachers. Creative Education, 11(9), 1572-1579. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2020.119115

  18. Ilany, B.-S., & Margolin, B. (2010). Language and mathematics: Bridging between natural language and mathematical language in solving problems in mathematics. Creative Education, 1(3), 138-148. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2010.13022

  19. Kliziene, I., Paskovske, A., Cizauskas, G., Augustiniene, A., Simonaitiene, B., & Kubiliunas, R. (2022). The impact of achievements in mathematics on cognitive ability in primary school. Brain Sciences, 12(6), 736. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12060736

  20. Kooloos, C., Oolbekkink-Marchand, H., van Boven, S., Kaenders, R., & Heckman, G. (2022). Building on student mathematical thinking in whole-class discourse: exploring teachers’ in-the-moment decision-making, interpretation, and underlying conceptions. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 25(4), 453-477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-021-09499-z

  21. Kung, M., Schmitt, S. A., Zhang, C., Whiteman, S. D., Yang, F., & Purpura, D. J. (2019). The role of mathematical language in mathematics development in China and the US. International Journal of Educational Research, 95, 131-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.02.008

  22. Kusmaryono, I., Jupriyanto, J., & Kusumaningsih, W. (2021). Construction of students' mathematical knowledge in the zone of proximal development and zone of potential construction. European Journal of Educational Research, 10(1), 341-351. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.10.1.341

  23. Kusmaryono, I., & Kusumaningsih, W. (2023). Evaluating the results of PISA assessment: Are there gaps between the teaching of mathematical literacy at schools and in PISA assessment? European Journal of Educational Research, 12(3), 1479-1493. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.12.3.1479

  24. Kusmaryono, I., Ubaidah, N., & Basir, M. A. (2020). The role of scaffolding in the deconstructing of thinking structure: A case study of pseudo-thinking process. Infinity Journal, 9(2), 247-262. https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v9i2.p247-262

  25. Matsumoto, D., & Nakai, T. (2023). Syntactic theory of mathematical expressions. Cognitive Psychology, 146, 101606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2023.101606

  26. Matthews, P. G., & Fuchs, L. S. (2020). Keys to the gate? Equal sign knowledge at second grade predicts fourth-grade algebra competence. Child development, 91(1), e14-e28. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13144

  27. Memon, M. A., Ting, H., Cheah, J.-H., Thurasamy, R., Chuah, F., & Cham, T. H. (2020). Journal of Applied Structural Equation Modeling. Journal of Applied Structural Equation Modeling, 4(2), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.47263/jasem.4(2)01

  28. Monteiro, L. C. S. (2022). Semiosis to communicate mathematics: Complementarity in the circularity of interpretations in mathematics for the development of creativity. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 19(2), 563-593. https://doi.org/10.54870/1551-3440.1564

  29. Mukuka, A., Balimuttajjo, S., & Mutarutinya, V. (2023). Teacher efforts towards the development of students' mathematical reasoning skills. Heliyon, 9(4), e14789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14789

  30. Mulwa, E. C. (2014). The role of the language of mathematics in students’ understanding of number concepts in Eldoret Municipality, Kenya. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 4(3), 264-274.

  31. Mutodi, P., & Mosimege, M. (2021). Learning mathematical symbolization: Conceptual challenges and instructional strategies in secondary schools. Bolema: Boletim de Educação Matemática, 35(70), 1180-1199. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-4415v35n70a29

  32. Nizaruddin, N., & Kusmaryono, I. (2023). Transforming students' pseudo-thinking into real thinking in mathematical problem solving. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 9(3), 477-491. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.9.3.477

  33. O’Halloran, K. L. (2023). Matter, meaning and semiotics. Visual Communication, 22(1), 174-201. https://doi.org/10.1177/14703572221128881

  34. OECD. (2018). PISA for development assessment and analytical framework: Reading, mathematics and science. OECD Publishing.

  35. OECD. (2022). PISA 2022 mathematics framework (draft). OECD Publishing.

  36. Purpura, D. J., & Reid, E. E. (2016). Mathematics and language: Individual and group differences in mathematical language skills in young children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 36, 259-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.12.020

  37. Rohid, N., Suryaman, S., & Rusmawati, R. D. (2019). Students' mathematical communication skills (MCS) in solving mathematics problems: A case in Indonesian context. Anatolian Journal of Education, 4(2), 19-30. https://doi.org/10.29333/aje.2019.423a

  38. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2016). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics (Reprint). Journal of Education, 196(2), 1-38. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741619600202

  39. Sreedevi, S. (2022). Study of test for significance of Pearson's correlation coefficient. International journal of multidisciplinary educational research, 11(2), 86-89.

  40. Tobia, V., Bonifacci, P., & Marzocchi, G. M. (2021). Symbolic versus non-symbolic training for improving early numeracy in preschoolers at risk of developing difficulties in mathematics. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 111, 103893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2021.103893

  41. Ventista, O. M., & Brown, C. (2023). Teachers’ professional learning and its impact on students’ learning outcomes: Findings from a systematic review. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 8(1), 100565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100565

  42. Viseu, F., Pires, A. L., Menezes, L., & Costa, A. M. (2021). Semiotic representations in the learning of rational numbers by 2nd grade Portuguese students. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 13(5), 611-624. https://doi.org/10.26822/iejee.2021.216

  43. Wilkinson, L. C. (2019). Learning language and mathematics: A perspective from Linguistics and Education. Linguistics and Education, 49, 86-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2018.03.005

  44. Wu, X., Zhang, Y., Wu, R., Tang, X., & Xu, T. (2022). Cognitive model construction and assessment of data analysis ability based on CDA. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 1009142. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1009142