Metacognitive behaviour of Malaysian students while solving mathematical problems of Form Three Assessment (PT3)
Tipo de documento
Autores
Ahmed, Surya | Halim, Abdul | Mokhtar, Mahani | Mun, Soh | Nurarfah, Sharifah
Lista de autores
Halim, Abdul, Ahmed, Surya, Nurarfah, Sharifah, Mun, Soh y Mokhtar, Mahani
Resumen
Several studies on metacognition have sought to solve mathematical problems. However, in Malaysia, there has yet to be a study investigating the metacognitive behaviour of students in solving mathematical problems of Form Three Assessment (Pentaksiran Tingkatan Tiga – PT3). This study was conducted to identify the metacognitive behaviour of students while solving mathematical problems in PT3 and examine differences in metacognitive behaviour among successful students (SS), partially successful students (PSS), and unsuccessful students (USS). A total of six (6) Form Three students in a school in Johor Bahru participated in this study. The research instrument used was the actual set of 2014’s PT3 questions. Data were analysed using the Thinking Aloud method with reference to Foong’s Taxonomy (1993), and it was supported by analysis of the students’ written work. Results showed seven types of metacognitive behaviour exhibited by the students, depending on the types of questions given. The analysis also found that each category of students showed different types of metacognitive behaviour while solving their PT3 mathematical problems. The SS group could control their metacognitive behaviour in mathematical problem-solving more regularly and frequently, the PSS students behaved moderately, while the USS group demonstrated limited metacognitive behaviour. As the results indicated differences in metacognitive behaviour among students of different performance levels, teachers should help students with weakness in solving mathematical problems implement metacognitive behaviour to strengthen their mathematical proficiency.
Fecha
2017
Tipo de fecha
Estado publicación
Términos clave
Instrumentos | Procesos cognitivos | Pruebas | Resolución de problemas
Enfoque
Nivel educativo
Idioma
Revisado por pares
Formato del archivo
Volumen
31
Número
59
Rango páginas (artículo)
907-927
ISSN
19804415
Referencias
ABDULLAH, A. H.; IBRAHIM, N. H.; SURIF, J.; ALI, M.; HAMZAH, M. H. Non-routinemathematical problems among in-service and pre-service mathematics teachers. In: 2014 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON TEACHING, ASSESSMENT AND LEARNING (TALE),IEEE, Proceedings. 2014. p. 18-24. ABDULLAH, A. H. & ZAKARIA, E. Enhancing students' level of geometric thinking through van hiele's phase-based learning. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, India, v. 6, n. 5, p. 4432- 4446, 2013. ABDULLAH, A. H.; RAHMAN, S. N. S. A.; HAMZAH, M. H. Metacognitive Skills of Malaysian Students in Non-Routine Mathematical Problem Solving. Bolema, Rio Claro, v. 31, n. 57, p. 310 – 322, 2017. ABDULLAH, F. A. P. The Patterns of Physics Problem-Solving from The Perspective of Metacognition. 345 f. Thesis (Doctor of Philosophy) - University of Cambridge, England. 2009. AHMAD, S.; AZWAWI, T. Isu-Isu Dalam Pendidikan Matematik. 1. ed. Kuala Lumpur. Utusan Publication & Distributors Sdn. Bhd, 2006. 135 p. CRISP, V. The Validity of Using Verbal Protocol Analysis To Investigate The Process Involved In Examination Marking. Research in Education, United States, v. 79, p. 1-12, 2008. EFFANDI Z.; Chin, L. C.; MD. YUSOFF, D. The Effects of Cooperative Learning on Students’ Mathematics Achievement and Attitude towards Mathematics. Journal of Social Sciences, Kuwait, v. 6, n. 2, p. 272-275, 2010. ELIA, I.; VAN DEN HEUVEL-PANHUIZEN, M.; KOLOVOU, A. Exploring strategy use and strategy flexibility in non-routine problem solving by primary school high achievers in mathematics. International Journal on Mathematics Education, ZDM, Germany, v. 41, n. 5, p. 605–618, 2009. ERICSSON, K. A.; SIMON, H. A. Verbal reports as data. Psychological review, United States, v. 87, n. 3, p. 215, 1980. FLAVELL, J. H. Cognitive Development. 4th. ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2002. 286 p. FLAVELL, J. H. Metacognitive Aspects of Problem Solving. In: RESNICK, LAUREN B (Ed.). The Nature of Intelligence. Hillsdale: Ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1976. p. 233. FOONG, P. Y. Development of framework for analyzing mathematical problem solving behaviours. Singapore Journal of Education, Singapore, v. 13, n. 1, p. 61-75. 1993. FOONG, P. Y. Differences in the processes of solving mathematical problems between successful and unsuccessful solvers. Teaching and Learning, United States, v. 14, n. 2, p. 61-72, 1994. KAZEMI, F.; FADAEE, M. R.; BAYAT, S. A subtle view to metacognitive aspect of mathematical problem solving. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, United Kingdom, v. 8, p. 420-426, 2010. LAKATOS, I. Proofs and Refutations: The Logic of Mathematical Discovery. 1. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976. 174 p. LESH, R.; ZAWOJEWSKI, J. Problem solving and modeling. In: F. K. LESTER J. R. (Ed.). Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning. Reston, VA: NCTM, 2007, p. 763-804. MUIR, T.; BESWICK, K. Where did I go wrong? Students’ success at various stages of the problem- solving process. In: THE 28TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE MATHEMATICSEDUCATION RESEARCH GROUP OF AUSTRALASIA, Proceeding. Melbourne, Australia, 2005. p. 561-568. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHERS OF MATHEMATICS. Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. 3. ed. Reston, VA: NCTM, 2000. 402 p. NEWELL, A.; SIMON, H. A. Review: Human problem solving. The American Journal of Psychology, United States, v. 86, n. 2, p. 449-455, 1972. OTERO, J.; CAMPANARIO, J. M.; HOPKINS, K. D. The relationship between academic achievement and metacognitive comprehension monitoring ability of spanish secondary school students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, United States, v. 52, n. 2, p. 419–430, 1992. POLYA, G. How To Solve It. 1. ed. Garden City, Ny: Doubleday, 1945. 65 p. POLYA, G. How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. 2. ed. Stanford University, 1957. 288 p. ROMPAYOM, P. et al. The development of metacognitive inventory to measure students’ metacognitive knowledge related to chemical bonding conceptions. In: INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT (IAEA) 2010. Proceedings. Bangkok:Srinakharinwirot University, 2010. p. 1-7. SCHOENFELD, A. H. Mathematical Problem Solving. 1. ed. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1985. 409 p. TRAININ, G.; SWANSON, H. L. Cognition, metacognition, and achievement of college students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, United States, v. 28, n. 4, p. 261-272, 2005. VRUGT, A.; OORT, F. J. Metacognition, achievement goals, study strategies and academic achievement: pathways to achievement. Metacognition and Learning, United States, v. 30, n. 5, p. 123–146, 2008. WONG, W. Y.; ABDULLAH, F. A. P. Level of awareness on low carbon society concept among secondary school students. In: Education Postgraduate Research Seminar (EDUPRESS) 2010. Proceedings. Malaysia: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 2011. p. 41-55. YEO, K. K. J. Secondary 2 students’ difficulties in solving non-routine problems. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning, United Kingdom, v. 8,1-p. 30, 2009 YEONG, W. C. Keupayaan dan Kelemahan Menyelesaikan Masalah Matematik Dalam Kalangan Pelajar Tingkatan Lima. 189 f. Research Project (Undergraduate) - Fakulti Pendidikan. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. 2010. ZAIDATUN, T. Hubungan Antara Persepsi Pelajar Terhadap Matematik Dengan Tahap Kemahiran Metakognitif Dalam Menyelesaikan Masalah Matematik. 1. ed. Skudai : Penerbit Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 2007. 115 p.