Metacognitive failure in constructing proof and how to scaffold it

Eka Resti Wulan, S. Subanji, M. Muksar
{"title":"Metacognitive failure in constructing proof and how to scaffold it","authors":"Eka Resti Wulan, S. Subanji, M. Muksar","doi":"10.24042/ajpm.v12i2.9590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research aims to describe the students’ metacognitive failure in constructing proof and the scaffolding support. The participants of this qualitative case study were eight preservice mathematics teachers of six-semester, State University of Malang. We carried out a test about proof construction problems in Abstract Algebra. Then we verified the data using triangulation of constant comparative method from a test and a task-based interview with the stimulated recall. The results indicated two groups of students in proving strategy.  Group I performed “appropriate” syntactic strategy and Group II vice versa. Blindness was experienced by the subject that does not recognize errors detection or the ambiguity of the proof. Mirage occurred when the subject recognizes an error detection on the proper strategy or application of a theorem, then is unable to verify the truth of his work. Misdirection appeared when the subject recognizes a lack of progress, then uses an incomplete or irrelevant concept. Vandalism emerged with no progress or detection of errors of the strategy then the subject performs some irrelevant steps to the issue or uses a misconception. Practically, the teachers can use these results for learning innovations in scaffolding-based proof courses. The scaffolding might need some development and application in supporting students to overcome difficulty in proving mathematical sentences. ","PeriodicalId":385020,"journal":{"name":"Al-Jabar : Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Al-Jabar : Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24042/ajpm.v12i2.9590","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

This research aims to describe the students’ metacognitive failure in constructing proof and the scaffolding support. The participants of this qualitative case study were eight preservice mathematics teachers of six-semester, State University of Malang. We carried out a test about proof construction problems in Abstract Algebra. Then we verified the data using triangulation of constant comparative method from a test and a task-based interview with the stimulated recall. The results indicated two groups of students in proving strategy.  Group I performed “appropriate” syntactic strategy and Group II vice versa. Blindness was experienced by the subject that does not recognize errors detection or the ambiguity of the proof. Mirage occurred when the subject recognizes an error detection on the proper strategy or application of a theorem, then is unable to verify the truth of his work. Misdirection appeared when the subject recognizes a lack of progress, then uses an incomplete or irrelevant concept. Vandalism emerged with no progress or detection of errors of the strategy then the subject performs some irrelevant steps to the issue or uses a misconception. Practically, the teachers can use these results for learning innovations in scaffolding-based proof courses. The scaffolding might need some development and application in supporting students to overcome difficulty in proving mathematical sentences. 
构建证据的元认知失败及如何支撑它
本研究旨在描述学生在构建证明和脚手架支持方面的元认知失败。本定性个案研究的对象为玛琅州立大学8名6学期的职前数学教师。我们对《抽象代数》中的证明构造问题进行了测试。在此基础上,通过实验和任务型访谈对实验数据进行了验证。结果表明,两组学生在证明策略。第一组采用“适当”的句法策略,第二组反之。盲目性是指主体不能识别错误、检测或证据的模糊性。海市蜃楼发生时,主体认识到错误的检测上正确的策略或应用定理,然后无法验证他的工作的真实性。当受试者意识到缺乏进展,然后使用不完整或不相关的概念时,就会出现误导。破坏行为出现在没有进展或检测策略错误的情况下,然后主体对问题执行一些无关的步骤或使用误解。实际上,教师可以将这些结果用于基于脚手架的证明课程的学习创新。在帮助学生克服数学句子的证明困难方面,还需要进一步的发展和应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信