Proses Penalaran Kuantitatif Menggunakan Kerangka Referensi Siswa Ditinjau Dari Gender
Abstract views: 150
,
3940 publish (Bahasa Indonesia) downloads: 118
Abstract
Abstract
The results of previous studies showed that the ratio of the differences in the level of quantitative reasoning abilities between male students and female students was quite significant. While the frame of reference refers to a series of mental actions through which individuals can regulate the processes and products of quantitative reasoning. Therefore, there are two main objectives of this study, namely to show whether or not there are differences in quantitative reasoning products using a frame of reference between male and female students, then to describe the process of quantitative reasoning using a frame of reference between male and female students. Using Sequential Mixed Methods, this study examined 58 students of class VIII junior high school. The research was conducted in two phases, namely the quantitative phase which included statistical data analysis using the Mann Withney Test to determine whether there were differences in the product of quantitative reasoning using the frame of reference for male and female students. Then the qualitative phase includes a description of the quantitative reasoning process using a frame of reference for male and female students. The results of the study stated that there were differences in the product of quantitative reasoning between male and female students. This is indicated by the results of statistical tests in the quantitative phase, while the qualitative phase found that male students were able to analyze the formulas that were determined according to the results of their own interpretation of the information provided implicitly or explicitly in the questions compared to female students.
Keywords: Quantitative Reasoning, Frame of Reference, Gender
Abstrak
Hasil penelitian sebelumnya menunjukan rasio perbedaan tingkat kemampuan penalaran kuantitatif antara siswa laki-laki dan siswa perempuan yang cukup signifikan. Sedang kerangka referensi merujuk pada serangkaian tindakan mental yang melaluinya individu dapat mengatur proses dan produk dari penalaran kuantitatif. Oleh karenanya, ada dua tujuan utama dari penelitian ini, yaitu menunjukkan ada atau tidak-nya perbedaan produk penalaran kuantitatif menggunakan kerangka referensi antara siswa laki-laki dan perempuan, selanjutnya mendeskripsikan proses penalaran kuantitatif menggunakan kerangka referensi antara siswa laki-laki dan perempuan. Menggunakan Sequential Mixed Methods penelitian ini mengkaji 58 orang siswa kelas VIII SMP. Penelitian dilakukan dengan dua fase, yaitu fase kuantitatif meliputi analisis data statistik menggunakan uji Mann Withney Test untuk mengetahui adakah perbedaan produk penalaran kuantitatif menggunakan kerangka referensi siswa laki-laki dan perempuan. selanjutnya fase kualitatif meliputi, deskripsi proses penalaran kuantitatif menggunakan kerangka referensi siswa laki-laki dan perempuan. Hasil penelitian menyatakan ada perbedaan produk penalaran kuantitatif antara siswa laki-laki dan perempuan. Hal ini ditunjukkan oleh hasil uji statistik pada fase kuantitatif, sedangkan fase kualitatif menemukan bahwa siswa laki-laki lebih dapat menganalisis rumus/formula yang ditentukan menurut hasil interpretasinya sendiri terhadap informasi yang diberikan secara implisit maupun eksplisit dalam soal disbanding siswa perempuan.
Kata Kunci: Penalaran Kuantitatif, Kerangka Referensi, Gender.
Downloads
References
K. Stacey, “The PISA view of mathematical literacy in Indonesia,” J. Math. Educ., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 95–126, 2011.
M. Muzaini, D. Juniati, and T. Y. E. Siswono, “Exploration of student’s quantitative reasoning in solving mathematical problem: Case study of field-dependent cognitive style,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1157, no. 3, 2019.
M. C. Pyryt, “Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor analytic studies,” Gifted and Talented International, vol. 13, no. 2. pp. 97–98, 1998.
P. W. Thompson, “ROUGH DRAFT Saturday, March 17, 1990 *,” no. March 1989, pp. 27–31, 1990.
M. A. Weber et al., “Clinical practice guidelines for the management of hypertension in the community a statement by the american society of hypertension and the international society of hypertension,” J. Hypertens., vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 3–15, 2014.
S. Joshua, N. Hatfield, S. Musgrave, and P. Thompson, “Frames of Reference, Quantitative Reasoning, Theoretical Perspective Consider the following problems that students encounter routinely in high school: Bobby is 3 years older than Lucy. When Bobby is,” pp. 31–44, 1999.
A. B. Ellis, “The influence of reasoning with emergent quantities on students’ generalizations,” Cogn. Instr., vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 439–478, 2007.
A. Ramful, “Quantitative reasoning in problem solving,” Res. Guid. Pract., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 15–20, 2015.
C. A. Dwyer, A. Gallagher, J. Levin, and M. E. Morley, “What Is Quantitative Reasoning? Defining the Construct for Assessment Purposes,” ETS Res. Rep. Ser., vol. 2003, no. 2, pp. i–48, 2003.
P. Thompson, “Quantitative Reasoning and Mathematical Modeling,” New Perspect. Dir. Collab. Res. Math. Educ., vol. 1, no. January 2011, pp. 33–57, 2011.
G. Park, D. Lubinski, and C. P. Benbow, “Contrasting intellectual patterns predict creativity in the arts and sciences: Tracking intellectually precocious youth over 25 years,” Psychol. Sci., vol. 18, no. 11, pp. 948–952, 2007.
J. Wai, D. Lubinski, and C. P. Benbow, “Spatial Ability for STEM Domains: Aligning Over 50 Years of Cumulative Psychological Knowledge Solidifies Its Importance,” J. Educ. Psychol., vol. 101, no. 4, pp. 817–835, 2009.
C. P. Benbow, D. Lubinski, D. L. Shea, and H. Eftekhari-sanjani, “Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability at age 13,” Psychol. Sci., no. 1980, pp. 474–480, 2000.
T. M. Hopkins, “TRACE : Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Gender Issues in Mathematics Achievement in Tennessee : Does Rural School Locale Matter ?,” 2004.
R. E. Stafford, “Hereditary and Environmental Components of Quantitative Reasoning,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 183–201, 1972.
Z. Tian and X. Huang, “A Study of Children’s Spatial Reasoning and Quantitative Reasoning Abilities,” J. Math. Educ. © Educ. All, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 80–93, 2009.
J. M. Lakin, “Sex differences in reasoning abilities: Surprising evidence that male-female ratios in the tails of the quantitative reasoning distribution have increased,” Intelligence, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 263–274, 2013.
W. Wang, C. Yuan, and W. Wang, “Gender Differences in Gifted Children ’ s Spatial , Verbal , and Quantitative Reasoning Abilities in Taiwan Department of Special Education and a consultant at the Center for Special Education at Chung Yuan Christian University , Gender Differences in Gif,” vol. 6708.
J. P. S. Iii and P. W. Thompson, “Algebra in the early grades,” Choice Rev. Online, vol. 46, no. 02, pp. 46-1024-46–1024, 2008.
E. T. Service, “Introduction to the Quantitative,” 2010.
