COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PYTHAGOREAN PROBLEMS IN INDONESIAN AND SINGAPOREAN MATHEMATICS TEXTBOOKS: AN OVERVIEW OF COGNITIVE LEVEL, REPRESENTATION FORM, CONTEXTUAL FEATURE, AND RESPONSE TYPE
Abstract
Several studies revealed that mathematics problems in textbooks, which were expected to encourage students’ reasoning and problem-solving skills, were still lacking. This study aimed to compare Pythagorean problems in Indonesian and Singaporean mathematics textbooks based on the cognitive level of Bloom's taxonomy, representation form, contextual feature, and response type. The data were collected through documentation and observation. The research results indicated that on the cognitive level, the C3-C4 level dominated the Pythagorean problems in Indonesian and Singaporean textbooks. Regarding representation form, Pythagorean problems in Indonesian textbooks used visual and combined forms, while Singaporean textbooks applied mostly combined forms. In contextual feature and response type, Pythagorean problems in Indonesian and Singaporean textbooks used non-application and closed-ended problems. Therefore, the result of this study is expected to contribute to the improvement of high-quality mathematics textbooks, which can compete internationally to support students’ learning.
Abstract:
Beberapa penelitian menunjukkan soal-soal matematika dalam buku ajar Indonesia yang diharapkan dapat mendorong kemampuan penalaran dan pemecahan masalah siswa masih kurang. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk membandingkan soal-soal Teorema Pythagoras dalam buku matematika Indonesia dan Singapura berdasarkan tingkat kognitif Bloom, bentuk representasi, fitur kontekstual, dan tipe respon. Pengumpulan data dilakukan melalui dokumentasi dan observasi. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pada tingkat kognitif, soal Pythagoras dalam buku teks Indonesia dan Singapura sebagian besar berada pada kategori C3-C4. Terkait bentuk representasi, soal-soal Pythagoras dalam buku Indonesia lebih banyak menggunakan bentuk visual dan gabungan, sedangkan buku Singapura lebih banyak menggunakan bentuk gabungan. Pada aspek fitur kontekstual dan tipe respon, soal-soal Pythagoras baik dalam buku Indonesia dan buku Singapura menggunakan soal non-aplikasi dan soal tertutup. Oleh kare itu, hasil penelitian ini diharapkan dapat berkontribusi pada peningkatan kualitas buku teks matematika yang dapat bersaing secara internasional, untuk mendukung pembelajaran siswa.
Downloads
References
Baqiyatussolihat. (2019). Studi Komparasi Buku Teks Matematika Dari Indonesia Dan Singapura Untuk Tingkat Menengah (Secondary School). Jakarta: Fakultas Ilmu Tarbiyah dan Keguruan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah.
Cady, J. A., Hodges, T. E., & Collins, R. L. (2015). A comparison of textbooks’ presentation of fractions. School Science and Mathematics, 115(3), 105–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12108.
Charalambous, C. Y., Delaney, S., Hsu, H.-Y., & Mesa, V. (2010). A comparative analysis of the addition and subtraction of fractions in textbooks from three countries. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 12(2), 117–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986060903460070.
Erbas, A. K., Alacaci, C., & Bulut, M. (2012). A Comparison of Mathematics Textbooks from Turkey, Singapore, and the United States of America. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(3), 2324–2329. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1000920.pdf.
Fan, L., Zhu, Y., & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbook research in mathematics education: development status and directions. Zdm, 45, 633–646. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11858-013-0539-x.
Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics: A guide for mathematicians. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 47(8). https://www.ams.org/notices/200008/comm-ferrini.pdf.
Giani, G., Zulkardi, Z., & Hiltrimartin, C. (2015). Analisis tingkat kognitif soal-soal buku teks matematika kelas VII berdasarkan taksonomi Bloom. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 9(2), 78–98. https://doi.org/10.22342/jpm.9.2.2125.78%20-%2098.
Hadi, S. (2012). Mathematics Education reform movement in Indonesia. Indonesia: Lambung Mangkurat University. http://eprints.ulm.ac.id/2141/1/The Matematics Education Reform Movement in Indonesia.pdf.
Hong, D. S., & Choi, K. M. (2014). A comparison of Korean and American secondary school textbooks: the case of quadratic equations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 85, 241–263. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10649-013-9512-4.
Ibrahim, M. (2012). Pengembangan Kurikulum dan Pembelajaran Biologi. Tangerang Selatan: Universitas Terbuka.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4). https://www.depauw.edu/files/resources/krathwohl.pdf.
Kul, Ü., Sevimli, E., & Aksu, Z. (2018). A comparison of mathematics questions in Turkish and Canadian school textbooks in terms of synthesized taxonomy. Turkish Journal of Education, 7(3), 136–155. https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.395162.
Lisarani, V. (2018). A comparative analysis of the tasks from the selected mathematics textbooks of Singapore and Indonesia in Pythagorean theorem unit. Universitas Negeri Malang.
Selvianiresa, D., & Prabawanto, S. (2017). Contextual teaching and learning approach of mathematics in primary schools. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 895(1), 12171. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/895/1/012171.
Sugiyono, D. (2013). Metode penelitian pendidikan pendekatan kuantitatif, kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Vicente, S., Sánchez, R., & Verschaffel, L. (2020). Word problem solving approaches in mathematics textbooks: a comparison between Singapore and Spain. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 35(3), 567–587. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10212-019-00447-3.
Wijaya, A., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Doorman, M. (2015). Opportunity-to-learn context-based tasks provided by mathematics textbooks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 89, 41–65. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10649-015-9595-1.
Yang, D.-C., Tseng, Y.-K., & Wang, T.-L. (2017). A comparison of geometry problems in middle-grade mathematics textbooks from Taiwan, Singapore, Finland, and the United States. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(7), 2841–2857. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00721a.
Copyright (c) 2023 Herani Tri Lestiana, Lifa Muflikhatul Maula, Widodo Winarso
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive 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 acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3)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 (See The Effect of Open Access).
