Teaching function using questioning and clarifying features
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.34117/bjdv10n3-044Keywords:
functions, reciprocal teaching, questioning, clarifyingAbstract
This study aims to determine how effective learning in students using questioning and clarifying sharpening through reciprocal teaching on function material. The initial stage of the research, students are formed into small groups that will ask and clarify the problems given. Then, the results will be displayed in class and responded to each other between groups. The final results of the research obtained learning procedures with questioning and clarifying features, namely how students ask and how students clarify questions in their small groups and large groups (class) on polynomial functions. A good impact for students is an increase in student learning outcomes, namely 86.7% of students are able to get a score of more than or equal to 75.
References
Artigue, M. (1999). The Teaching and Learning of Mathematics at the University Level. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 46(11), 1377–1385.
Barrow, W. (2015). “I think she’s learnt how to sort of let the class speak”: Children’s perspectives on Philosophy for Children as participatory pedagogy. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 17, 76–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2015.06.003
Bergqvist, T., & Lithner, J. (2012). Mathematical reasoning in teachers’ presentations. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31(2), 252–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2011.12.002
Brown, R. G. (2010). Does the introduction of the graphics calculator into system-wide examinations lead to change in the types of mathematical skills tested ? 181–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-009-9220-2
Cooper, T., & Greive, C. (2009). The Effectiveness of the Methods of Reciprocal Teaching. Teach, 3(1), 45–52. http://research.avondale.edu.au/teach/
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mix Method Approaches (V. Knight (Ed.); 4th ed.). SAGE Publication Asia-Pasific Pte. Ltd.
Cuquet, M., & García San Pedro, M. J. (2019). Percepciones y uso de la Wikipedia en alumnos de educación secundaria [Perceptions and Usage of Wikipedia among Secondary Education Students]. Education in the Knowledge Society, 20.
Foster, R., & Tall, D. (1996). Can all children climb the same curriculum ladder? Mathematics in School, 25(3), 8–12. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30211761
Hidayat, fadjar noer, & Tamimuddin, M. (2015). MODIL GURU PEMBELAJARAN: PEMANFAATAN APLIKASI GEOGEBRA UNTUK PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA ( DASAR ). Direktorat Jenderal Guru dan Tenaga Kependidikan Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.
Kurt, M. (2017). Quality in reflective thinking : elicitation and classification of reflective acts. Quality & Quantity. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0609-1
Lewis, C. C., Perry, Æ. R. R., & Hurd, Æ. J. (2009). Improving mathematics instruction through lesson study : a theoretical model and North American case. 285–304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-009-9102-7
Lòpez, V., Couso, D., & Simarro, C. (2018). Educación STEM en y para el mundo digital . Cómo y por qué llevar las herramientas digitales a las aulas de ciencias , matemáticas, artes y tecnologías. Revista de Educación a Distancia, 1.
Lyz’, N., Istratova, O., & Lyz’, A. (2020). Opportunities and Risks of Students’ Information-Educational Online Activity. Open Education, 24(4). https://doi.org/10.21686/1818-4243-2020-4-67-74
Mcallum, R. (2014a). Reciprocal Teaching : Critical Reflection on Practice. Kairaranga, 15(1), 26–35.
Mcallum, R. (2014b). Reciprocal Teaching: Critical Reflection on Practice. 15.
Novitasari, M., Sutama, Narimo, S., Fathoni, A., Rahmawati, L., & Widyasari, C. (2020). Habituation of digital literacy and critical thinking in mathematics in elementary school. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 9(3).
Olia, T., Zacharia, Z., & Tasos, H. (2010). EXAMINING WHETHER SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS MAKE CHANGES SUGGESTED BY EXPERT OR PEER ASSESSORS IN THE SCIENCE WEB-PORTFOLIOS.
Özerem, A. (2012). Misconceptions in Geometry and Suggested Solutions. International Journal of New Trends in Arts, Sports & Science Education -, 1(4), 23–35.
Sari, N. K. (2016). Menggunakan Penajaman Ciri Questioning & Clarifying Untuk Membelajarkan Fungsi Polinomial ( Using the Improvement of Questioning & Clarifying Marks to Teach of Polynomial Functions ). 1(2), 27–33.
Sari, N. K., Budiarto, M. T., & Ekawati, R. (2023). Level Kompetensi Digital Mahasiswa Pada Bidang Pemecahan Masalah. SJME (Supremum Journal of Mathematics Education), 7(1), 45–54. https://doi.org/10.35706/sjme.v7i1.6629
Sari, N. K., Budiarto, M. T., & Rozhana, K. M. (2021). Students’ Digital Thinking Skills in Solving Mathematics Problems. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Mathematics and Mathematics Education (ICMMEd 2020), 550. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210508.076
Saxon, J. A., Treffinger, D. J., Young, G. C., & Wittig, C. V. (2003). Comp invention®: A creative, inquiry-based summer enrichment program for elementary students. Journal of Creative Behavior, 37(1), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2003.tb00826.x
Schoen, J. L., Bowler, J. L., & Schilpzand, M. C. (2018). Conditional Reasoning Test for Creative Personality: Rationale, Theoretical Development, and Validation. Journal of Management, 44(4), 1651–1677. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315618012
Seeger, F., Education, M., Voigt, J., Education, M., Munster, U., Waschescio, U., & Education, M. (1998). The Culture of the Mathematics Classroom. In The Culture of the Mathematics Classroom. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511720406
Siiman, L. A., Mäeots, M., Pedaste, M., Simons, R. J., Leijen, Ä., Rannikmäe, M., Võsu, K., & Timm, M. (2016). An instrument for measuring students’ perceived digital competence according to the DIGCOMP framework. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 9753, 233–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39483-1_22
Simonton, D. K. (2016). Defining Creativity : Don ’ t We Also Need to Define What Is Not Creative ? 0, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.137
Siswono, T. Y. E. (2011). Level of student’s creative thinking in classroom mathematics. Educational Research and Reviews.
Sundahry, Fitria, Y., & Rakimahwati. (2018). The effect reciprocal teaching strategy of critical thinking skills in learning tematic class V. PROCEEDING ICESST 2018 International Conferences on Education, Social Sciences and Technology, 816–822. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.29210/20181118
Tall, D., Winkelmann, B., & Bielefeld, U. (n.d.). Hidden Algorithms and the Drawing of Discontinuous Functions. 1–11.
Tohir, M., Susanto, Hobri, Suharto, & Dafik. (2018). Students’ Creative Thinking Skills in Solving Mathematics Olympiad Problems Based on Problem-Solving Polya and Krulik-Rudnick Model. Advanced Science Letters, 24(11), 8361–8364. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2018.12563
Tracy, S. J. (n.d.). QualitativE research METHODS.
Trouche, L., Rocha, K., Gueudet, G., & Pepin, B. (2020). Transition to digital resources as a critical process in teachers’ trajectories: the case of Anna’s documentation work. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 52(7), 1243–1257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01164-8
Vinet, L., & Zhedanov, A. (2011). Mathematical Formulas and Integrals. In Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical (Vol. 44, Issue 8).
Мисис, Н.-исследовательский. (2019). Использование электронной образовательной среды для междисциплинарных связей на примере профессиональной подготовки бакалавров по направлению « Бизнес – информатика » The use of electronic educational environment for interdisciplinary relations on the exa.
Трансформация образования в условиях цифровизации. (2019). Открытое Образование, 23(4).
