Critical Thinking Profile of Junior High School Class VIII Students in Solving the Pythagoras Theorem Problem in Review of Spatial Ability

N. Nurfadila, Sutji Rochaminah, Nurhayadi Nurhayadi
{"title":"Critical Thinking Profile of Junior High School Class VIII Students in Solving the Pythagoras Theorem Problem in Review of Spatial Ability","authors":"N. Nurfadila, Sutji Rochaminah, Nurhayadi Nurhayadi","doi":"10.22487/j25490192.2020.v4.i1.pp12-24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this research is to obtain a description of the critical thinking profile of Junior High School Class VIII students in solving the Pythagoras theorem problem in review of spatial ability. This research uses qualitative methods based on the category of critical thinking according to Jacob and Sam. The results of research showed a critical thinking profile of high spatial ability subject (MC) on the categories: (1) Clarification, namely formulating problems and information accurately and clearly, as well as describing rectangles, (2) Assessment, namely choosing and using the formula of another subject, one right triangle to facilitate problem solving, (3) Inference, which is making precise and clear conclusions based on the information obtained, (4) Strategies, namely predicting answers using triple Pythagoras and proposing other alternatives by choosing other right triangle images and making another formula. The critical thinking profile of moderate spatial ability subject (BT) on the categories: (1) Clarification, namely formulating problems and information precisely and clearly, and describing the square, (2) Assessment, which is choosing a physical triangle elbows to facilitate problem solving, using other lesson formulas, but the formula used is not correct, (3) Inference, which is making inaccurate conclusions because it is not accurate, (4) strategies, namely evaluating solutions that are lacking right and have no other way of solving problems. The critical thinking profile of low spatial ability subject (AR) on the categories: (1) clarification, which is to formulate problems and information clearly but less precisely by writing and reciting the answer and no rectangular images known,(2) Assessment, which is choosing and using an inappropriate formula with inappropriate reasons, (3) Inference (inference), which is making inaccurate conclusions, (4) Strategies, namely unable to propose or predict or evaluate the answer and also have no other way of solving problems.","PeriodicalId":373677,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Riset Pendidikan MIPA","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Riset Pendidikan MIPA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22487/j25490192.2020.v4.i1.pp12-24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to obtain a description of the critical thinking profile of Junior High School Class VIII students in solving the Pythagoras theorem problem in review of spatial ability. This research uses qualitative methods based on the category of critical thinking according to Jacob and Sam. The results of research showed a critical thinking profile of high spatial ability subject (MC) on the categories: (1) Clarification, namely formulating problems and information accurately and clearly, as well as describing rectangles, (2) Assessment, namely choosing and using the formula of another subject, one right triangle to facilitate problem solving, (3) Inference, which is making precise and clear conclusions based on the information obtained, (4) Strategies, namely predicting answers using triple Pythagoras and proposing other alternatives by choosing other right triangle images and making another formula. The critical thinking profile of moderate spatial ability subject (BT) on the categories: (1) Clarification, namely formulating problems and information precisely and clearly, and describing the square, (2) Assessment, which is choosing a physical triangle elbows to facilitate problem solving, using other lesson formulas, but the formula used is not correct, (3) Inference, which is making inaccurate conclusions because it is not accurate, (4) strategies, namely evaluating solutions that are lacking right and have no other way of solving problems. The critical thinking profile of low spatial ability subject (AR) on the categories: (1) clarification, which is to formulate problems and information clearly but less precisely by writing and reciting the answer and no rectangular images known,(2) Assessment, which is choosing and using an inappropriate formula with inappropriate reasons, (3) Inference (inference), which is making inaccurate conclusions, (4) Strategies, namely unable to propose or predict or evaluate the answer and also have no other way of solving problems.
空间能力复习中初八班学生解决毕达哥拉斯定理问题的批判性思维概况
摘要本研究旨在了解初八班学生在空间能力检视中解决毕达哥拉斯定理问题时的批判性思维状况。本研究采用定性方法,根据雅各布和山姆的批判性思维的范畴。研究结果表明,高空间能力被试在以下方面具有批判性思维特征:(1)澄清,即准确、清晰地表述问题和信息,并描述矩形;(2)评估,即选择和使用另一个主题的公式,一个直角三角形,以促进问题的解决;(3)推理,即根据所获得的信息做出精确、清晰的结论;即使用三重毕达哥拉斯来预测答案,并通过选择其他直角三角形图像和制作另一个公式来提出其他替代方案。中等空间能力被试的批判性思维特征:(1)澄清,即准确而清晰地表述问题和信息,并描述正方形;(2)评估,即选择一个物理三角形肘部以方便解决问题,使用其他课程公式,但使用的公式不正确;(3)推理,即由于不准确而得出不准确的结论;(4)策略,即评估缺乏正确且没有其他解决问题的方法的解决方案。低空间能力被试在类别上的批判性思维特征:(1)澄清,即通过书写和背诵答案,不知道矩形图像,清晰但不精确地表述问题和信息;(2)评估,即选择和使用不适当的公式,不适当的理由;(3)推断(Inference),即得出不准确的结论;(4)策略,即无法提出或预测或评估答案,也没有其他解决问题的方法。
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