Multi-representation raised by prospective teachers in expressing algebra

Abstract

This study investigates multi-representations raised by prospective teachers in expressing algebra. Through a case study approach, as many as 112 prospective mathematics education teachers from Universitas Negeri Malang of Indonesia participated in this research. researchers use test, interview and research sheet instruments as data collection tools. Then an analysis is carried out so that the following categories are obtained: subjects that symbolically express algebra, pictorial, and geometric. The results obtained that some subjects express symbolically algebra (83 of 112 subjects), while some subjects expressed pictorially (17 of 112 subjects), and geometrically (12 of 112 subjects). The research findings show that there are three forms of representation raised by the subject in expressing algebra, namely the representation of algebraic symbols, image representations, and geometric representations. Most of the participants produced algebraic symbolic representations and some of them experienced obstacles in producing pictorial representations and geometric representations, also researcher found similar patterns in producing geometric representation namely, perception, appearance, strategy, and re-examination. Researchers recommend geometric representations for further research because they tend to be done by subjects with high mathematical abilities and rarely found research that produces geometrical representations when solving algebraic problems.

Keywords

• Symbolic representations of algebraic,pictorial representation,geometrical representations,algebraic expression

References

1. Addition, I. (2015). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics a proposed instructional theory for integer addition and subtraction a proposed instructional theory for integer addition and subtraction. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 43(4), 428–464.
2. Adu-gyamfi & Bosse. (2013). Processes and reasoning in representations of linear functions, (March). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9416-x
3. Afriyani, D., Sa’Dijah, C., Subanji, S., & Muksar, M. (2019). Students’ construction error in translation among mathematical representations. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(3), 0–6. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/3/032098
4. Amir, M. F., Mufarikhah, I. A., Wahyuni, A., Nasrun, & Rudyanto, H. E. (2019). Developing ‘Fort Defending’ Game as a Learning Design for Mathematical Literacy Integrated to Primary School Curriculum in Indonesia. Elementary Education Online, 18(3), 1081–1092.
5. Baek, J. M., Wickstrom, M. H., Tobias, J. M., Miller, A. L., Safak, E., Wessman-Enzinger, N., & Kirwan, J. V. (2017). Preservice teachers’ pictorial strategies for a multistep multiplicative fraction problem. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 45, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2016.10.005
6. Beckmann, S., & Izsák, A. (2015). Two perspectives on proportional relationships: Extending complementary origins of multiplication in terms of quantities. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 46(1), 17–38. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.46.1.0017
7. Blanton, M., Stephens, A., Knuth, E., Gardiner, A. M., Isler, I., Kim, J., … Kim, J. (2015). The development of children’s algebraic thinking: The impact of a comprehensive early algebra intervention in third grade, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 46(1), 39–87.
8. Boonen, A. J. H., Van Wesel, F., Jolles, J., & Van der Schoot, M. (2014). The role of visual representation type, spatial ability, and reading comprehension in word problem solving: An item-level analysis in elementary school children. International Journal of Educational Research, 68, 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2014.08.001

9. Bruce, C. D., Davis, B., Sinclair, N., McGarvey, L., Hallowell, D., Drefs, M., … Woolcott, G. (2017). Understanding gaps in research networks: using “spatial reasoning” as a window into the importance of networked educational research. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 95(2), 143–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-016-9743-2
10. Cankoy, O., & Özder, H. (2011). The influence of visual representations and context on mathematical word problem solving bağlam ve görsel anlatımların matematiksel sözel problem çözümüne etkisi (The influence of visual representations and context on mathematical word problem solving), Pamukkale University Faculty of Education Journal , 30, 91–100.
11. Chang, B. L., Cromley, J. G., & Tran, N. (2016). Coordinating multiple representations in a reform calculus textbook. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(8), 1475–1497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9652-3
12. Covington, A. C., Sheppard, P., Flint, T. K., & Tackie, N. A. (2019). To what extent does hands-on exposure to algebraic thinking predict mathematics achievement for urban middle schoolers? Journal of Educational Issues, 5(1), 118. https://doi.org/10.5296/jei.v5i1.14460
13. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston, United States of America: Pearson Education.
14. David, M. M., Tomaz, V. S., & Ferreira, M. C. C. (2014). How visual representations participate in algebra classes’ mathematical activity. ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education, 46, 95–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0550-2
15. de la Fuente & Deulofeu. (2016). Translation between language representation in problem solving as a tool to construct algebraic. 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education Hamburg , 24-31 July 2016, (July), 1–4.
16. Dogan-dunlap, H. (2010). Linear algebra students ’ modes of reasoning : Geometric representations. Linear Algebra and Its Applications, 432(8), 2141–2159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2009.08.037
17. Fujita, T., Kondo, Y., Kumakura, H., & Kunimune, S. (2017). Students’ geometric thinking with cube representations: Assessment framework and empirical evidence. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 46, 96–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.03.003
18. Garnelo, M., & Shanahan, M. (2019). Reconciling deep learning with symbolic artificial intelligence: representing objects and relations. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 29, 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.12.010
19. Haciomeroglu, E. S., & LaVenia, M. (2017). Object-spatial imagery and verbal cognitive styles in high school students. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 124(3), 689–702. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031512517698555
20. Herbst, P., & Kosko, K. W. (2013). Using representations of practice to elicit mathematics teachers ’ tacit knowledge of practice : a comparison of responses to animations and videos. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 17, 515–537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-013-9267-y
21. Huang, R., & Kulm, G. (2012). Prospective middle grade mathematics teachers’ knowledge of algebra for teaching. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31(4), 417–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2012.06.001
22. Ina V.S. Mullis, Michael O. Martin, Pierre Foy, & Arora. A. (2012). Timss 2011 International Results in Mathematics. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center (Vol. 2012).
23. Jacobs, V. R., Franke, M. L., Carpenter, T. P., Levi, L., Jacobs, R., Franke, M. L., … Battey, D. (2015). Professional Development Focused on Children ’ s Algebraic Reasoning in Elementary School of, 38(3), 258–288.
24. Jupri, A., Drijvers, P., & van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2014). Difficulties in initial algebra learning in Indonesia. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26(4), 683–710. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-013-0097-0
25. Karakok, G. (2019). Making connections among representations of eigenvector: what sort of a beast is it? ZDM - Mathematics Education, (0123456789). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01061-9
26. Karakok, G., Stephenie, H. S., & Dyben, A. (2014). Secondary teachers ’ conception of various forms of complex numbers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 18, 327–351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-014-9288-1
27. Kidron, I., & Tall, D. (2015). The roles of visualization and symbolism in the potential and actual infinity of the limit process, Educational Studies in Mathematics, 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-014-9567-x
28. Kospentaris, G., Vosniadou, S., Kazi, S., & Thanou, E. (2016). Visual and analytic strategies in geometry. Frontline Learning Research 4(1), 40-57. http://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v4i1.226
29. Kotsopoulos, D., Zambrzycka, J., & Makosz, S. (2017). Gender differences in toddlers’ visual-spatial skills. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 19(3), 167–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2017.1328634
30. Lailiyah, S., Nusantara, T., Sa’Dijah, C., Irawan, E. B., Kusaeri, & Asyhar, A. H. (2018). Structuring students’ analogical reasoning in solving algebra problem. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 296(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/296/1/012029
31. Leikin, R., Leikin, M., Waisman, I., & Shaul, S. (2013). Effect of the presence of external representations on accuracy and reaction time in solving mathematical double-choice problems by students of different levels of instruction. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(5), 1049–1066. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9389-1
32. Lepak, J. R., Wernet, J. L. W., & Ayieko, R. A. (2018). Capturing and characterizing students ’ strategic algebraic reasoning through cognitively demanding tasks with focus on representations. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, (October 2017), 0–1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2018.01.003
33. Levenberg, I. (2014). Formulation of word problems in geometry by gifted pupils. Journal for the Education of the Young Scientist and Giftedness, 2(2), 28–28. https://doi.org/10.17478/jeysg.201429019
34. Llinares, S., & Clemente, F. (2014). Characteristics of pre-service primary school teachers’ configural reasoning. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 16(3), 234–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2014.921133
35. Lutaif, B., Gabriel, B., Lima, L. De, & Gomes, E. (2019). Linear algebra in engineering : an analysis of Latin American studies. ZDM, (0123456789). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01081-5
36. Mamolo, A., Ruttenberg-Rozen, R., & Whiteley, W. (2015). Developing a network of and for geometric reasoning. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47, 483-496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0654-3
37. Máté, I. (2019). The foundation of the romany students’ algebra knowledge through text-based problems, 12(1), 191–199. https://doi.org/10.24193/adn.12.1.14.192
38. Mcgee, E. O. (2016). Robust and Fragile Mathematical Identities : A Framework for Exploring Racialized Experiences and High Achievement Among Black College Students, 46(5), 599–625. http://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.46.5.0599
39. Montenegro, P., Costa, C., & Lopes, B. (2018). Transformations in the Visual Representation of a Figural Pattern Transformations in the Visual Representation of a Figural Pattern. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 20(2), 91–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2018.1441599
40. Natsheh, I., & Karsenty, R. (2014). Exploring the potential role of visual reasoning tasks among inexperienced solvers. ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education, 46(1), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0551-1
41. Ott, N., Brünken, R., Vogel, M., & Malone, S. (2018). Multiple symbolic representations: The combination of formula and text supports problem solving in the mathematical field of propositional logic. Learning and Instruction, 58(April), 88–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.04.010
42. Papadopoulos, I. (2019). Using mobile puzzles to exhibit certain algebraic habits of mind and demonstrate symbol-sense in primary school students. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 53(July), 210–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2018.07.001
43. Pitta-pantazi, D., & Christou, C. (2010). Spatial versus object visualisation: The case of mathematical understanding in three-dimensional arrays of cubes and nets. International Journal of Educational Research, 49(2–3), 102–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2010.10.001
44. Powell, S. R., Gilbert, J. K., & Fuchs, L. S. (2019). Variables influencing algebra performance: Understanding rational numbers is essential. Learning and Individual Differences, 74(July), 101758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2019.101758
45. Presmeg, N. (2014). Contemplating visualization as an epistemological learning tool in mathematics, ZDM-Mathematics Education, 46, 151–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0561-z
46. Sa’dijah, C., Afriyani, D., Subanji, S., & Muksar, M. (2018). Characteristics of students’ mathematical understanding in solving multiple representation task based on Solo Taxonomy. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 13(3), 281–287. https://doi.org/10.12973/iejme/3920
47. Sajadi, M., Amiripour, P., & Rostamy-Malkhalifeh, M. (2013). The examinig mathematical word problems solving ability under efficient representation aspect. Mathematics Education Trends and Research, 2013, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.5899/2013/metr-00007
48. Sandoval, I., & Possani, E. (2016). An analysis of different representations for vectors and planes in R 3 Learning challenges. Educational Studies in Mathematics, (1), 109–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-015-9675-2
49. Santia, I., & Sutawidjadja, A. (2019). Ill-structured problems: The case of quadratic, Journal on Mathematics Education, 10(3), 365–378.
50. Sari, D. P., Darhim, D., & Rosjanuardi, R. (2018). Errors of Students Learning With React Strategy in Solving the Problems of Mathematical Representation Ability. Journal on Mathematics Education, 9(1), 121–128. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.9.1.4378.121-128
51. Souto-Robio. (2012). Visualizing mathematics at university? Examples from theory and practice of a linear algebra course, 695–714.
52. Teppo, A., & van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2014). Visual representations as objects of analysis: The number line as an example. ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0518-2
53. Thom, J. S., & Mcgarvey, L. M. (2015). The act and artifact of drawing ( s ): observing geometric thinking with , in , and through children ’ s drawings. ZDM, 47(3), 465–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0697-0
54. van Lieshout, E. C. D. M., & Xenidou-Dervou, I. (2018). Pictorial representations of simple arithmetic problems are not always helpful: a cognitive load perspective. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 98(1), 39–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9802-3
55. Walkington, C., Sherman, M., & Petrosino, A. (2012). “ Playing the game” of story problems: Coordinating situation-based reasoning with algebraic representation. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31(2), 174–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2011.12.009
56. Walkowiak, T. A. (2014). Elementary and middle school students’ analyses of pictorial growth patterns. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 33(1), 56–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.09.004
57. Yang, K. L., & Li, J. L. (2018). A framework for assessing reading comprehension of geometric construction texts. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(1), 109–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9770-6
58. Zahner, D., & Corter, J. E. (2010). The process of probability problem solving: Use of external visual representations. Mathematical Thinking and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986061003654240
59. Zayyadi, M. (2020). Content and pedagogical knowledge of prospective teachers in mathematics learning: commognitive framework. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 8(March), 515–532. https://doi.org/10.17478/jegys.642131