DEFRAGMENTİNG STUDENTS' THİNKİNG STRUCTURE İN SOLVİNG MATHEMATİCAL ARGUMENTS
نویسندگان
چکیده
The structure of thinking is a representation the thought process in form problem-solving flow that carried out by person when he resolves problem. many students make mistakes solving problems. One way can be done to overcome these errors defragment thought. This study aims describe students’ erroneous mathematical argument and defragmenting efforts. 10th Grade high school Pasuruan, East Java, Indonesia, were involved as research subjects. They selected based on three criteria, namely low, moderate level procedural error. activity ‘think loud’ was used observe made argument. data obtained from this codified later basis perform process. Based findings study, it concluded are error determining value x an equation, modeling argument, proving valid Defragmenting using scaffolding approach improve students' problems
منابع مشابه
A General Structure for Legal Arguments
A Bayesian network (BN) is a graphical model of uncertainty that is especially well-suited to legal arguments. It enables us to visualise and model dependencies between different hypotheses and pieces of evidence and to calculate the revised probability beliefs about all uncertain factors when any piece of new evidence is presented. Although BNs have been widely discussed and recently used in t...
متن کامل‘Not quite right’: helping students to make better arguments
This paper looks at the need for a better understanding of the impediments to critical thinking in relation to graduate student work. The paper argues that a distinction is needed between two vectors that influence student writing: (1) the word-level sentence-level vector; and (2) the grammar inferencing vector. It is suggested that much of the work being done to assist students is only done on...
متن کاملCharacterizing Uncertainty Associated with Middle School Students’ Scientific Arguments
In this study, we investigated how students’ claim, justification, uncertainty, and conditions of rebuttal contribute to the measurement of the overall scientific argumentation ability. We designed six sets of items, each of which consisted of claim, justification, uncertainty rating, and conditions of rebuttal items. These item sets addressed six investigations related to climate change and ex...
متن کاملPerceptions of the Qualities of Written Arguments by Japanese Students
This study examines how Japanese students perceive the qualities of written arguments that were constructed to have different forms. Based on the theoretical dimensions of verbal communication styles that Gudykunst and Ting-Toomey proposed, the research questions asked whether the respondents would perceive direct arguments to be of higher quality than indirect arguments. They also asked whethe...
متن کاملDiagonal arguments and fixed points
A universal schema for diagonalization was popularized by N.S. Yanofsky (2003), based on a pioneering work of F.W. Lawvere (1969), in which the existence of a (diagonolized-out and contradictory) object implies the existence of a fixed-point for a certain function. It was shown that many self-referential paradoxes and diagonally proved theorems can fit in that schema. Here, we fi...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: Jurnal Aksioma
سال: 2022
ISSN: ['2089-8703', '2442-5419']
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24127/ajpm.v11i3.5061