Pre-Service Primary School Teachers’ Mathematical Reasoning Skills from Gender Perspectives: A Case Study

Abstract

A person's reasoning can be seen through his or her way in solving a problem. A person's reasoning can be explored in systematic ways. This study aimed at exploring student reasoning at the stage of understanding the problem and looking back in terms of gender differences. The sample of this study were one male and one female students at Halu Oleo University Kendari, Indonesia. This research was a qualitative research. Student reasoning data were obtained using the main instruments namely the researcher and supporting instruments namely mathematics ability tests, problem solving tests, information form, and interview guidelines. Subject selection was based on a gender questionnaire analysis. The data obtained were analyzed qualitatively. The results showed that there were differences in the reasoning of male and female student teachers, in which at the stage of understanding the problem, the answers given by the male student was more detailed than those by the female one. Whereas in looking back stage, both male and female performed the steps in the same way both in terms of checking the problem solving and calculation steps. 

Keywords

• mathematical reasoning skils,gender,pre-service primary school teacher

Supporting Institution

University of Halu Oleo and State University of Surabaya

Project Number

Research grant university

Thanks

The author would like thanks for giving research grant university (University of Halu Oleo),

References

1. Artzt, A., & Yaloz-Femia, S. (1999). Mathematical reasoning during small-group problem-solving. Developing mathematical reasoning in grades K-12, 61, 115.
2. Clerkin, B., & Macrae, F. (2012). Men are more intelligent than women, claims new study. Situs http://www. Dailymail. co. uk/news/article-405056/Men-Intelligent-women-claims-new-study. html. Download: Diakses, 4 Oktober 2019.
3. DeJarnette, A. F., & González, G. (2013). Building students' reasoning skills by promoting student-led discussions in an algebra II class. The Mathematics Educator, 23(1), 3-23.
4. Fraenkle, J.R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGrow-Hill.
5. Geary, D. C., Saults, S. J., Liu, F., & Hoard, M. K. (2000). Sex differences in spatial cognition, computational fluency, and arithmetical reasoning. Journal of Experimental Child psychology, 77(4), 337-353. DOI: 10.1006/jecp.2000.2594
6. Halat, E. (2008). In-service middle and high school mathematics teachers: Geometric reasoning stages and gender. The Mathematics Educator, 18(1).
7. Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(3859), 1243-1248.
8. Huda, S., Sholikhakh, R. A., Bina, N. S., Lestari, F., Habibi, B., & Suharso, P. Effect of application smart circuit learning media to mathematics learning outcomes: a case study of islamic school students. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 7(3), 699-715. DOI: 10.17478/jegys.597053

9. Holisin, I., & Budayasa, I. K. (2017). Comparison of male and female primary school student reasoning profiles in solving fractional problems. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 12(6), 1153-1565.
10. Karaduman, G. B., & Erbaş, A. A. Investigation of primary school teacher candidates' metacognitive awareness level. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 5(4), 31-48. DOI: 10.17478/JEGYS.2017.68
11. Keitel, C. 1988. An Introduction: social justice and mathematics education: gender, class, ethnicity and the politics of schooling. In Christine Keitel (Ed). Social Justice and Mathematics Education.Berlin Freie Universitat Berlin.
12. Kenney, P. A., & Lindquist, M. M. (2000). Students’ performance on thematically related NAEP Tasks. Results from the seventh mathematics assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress, 343-363.
13. Krutet︠s︡kiĭ, V. A., Wirszup, I., & Kilpatrick, J. (1976). The psychology of mathematical abilities in schoolchildren. University of Chicago Press.
14. Lahey, B. B., Schneider, S. A., Landrum, R. E., & Landrum, T. (1995). Psychology: An introduction. Brown & Benchmark Publishers.
15. Lithner, J. (2008). A research framework for creative and imitative reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67(3), 255-276. DOI : 10.1007/s10649-007-9104-2
16. Mahmud, M., & Nur, S. (2018). Exploring students'learning strategies and gender differences in english language teaching. International Journal of Language Education, 2(1), 51-64. DOI : 10.26858/ijole.v2i1.4346
17. Mhlanga, M. T. (2017). Students’ critical ability in solving mathematics problem based on gender. International Journal of Science Arts and Commerce, 2(1), 67–74.
18. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis. USA: Arizona State University.
19. Moleong, L. J. (2013). Metodologi penelitian kualitatif [Qualitative research methodology]. Bandung: Rosdakarya.
20. Monto, M. A. (1993). An exercise in gender: the bem sex role inventory in the classroom. Clinical Sociology Review, 11(1), 13-16.
21. Peter, S & Yani S. (2008). Kamus bahasa indonesia kontemporer [Contemporary Indonesian dictionary]. Jakarta; Balai Pustaka
22. Piraksa, C., Srisawasdi, N., & Koul, R. (2014). Effect of gender on student's scientific reasoning ability: a case study in Thailand. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 486-491. DOI : 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.245
23. Rahman, A., & Ahmar, A. (2016). Exploration of mathematics problem solving process based on the thinking level of students in junior high school. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(14), 7278-7285.
24. Reynolds, M. R., Scheiber, C., Hajovsky, D. B., Schwartz, B., & Kaufman, A. S. (2015). Gender differences in academic achievement: is writing an exception to the gender similarities hypothesis?. The Journal of genetic psychology, 176(4), 211-234. DOI: 10.1080/00221325.2015.1036833
25. Sagala, R., Umam, R., Thahir, A., Saregar, A., & Wardani, I. (2019). The effectiveness of STEM-Based on gender differences: the impact of physics concept understanding. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(3), 753-761. DOI : 10.12973/eu-jer.8.3.753
26. Samuelsson, M., & Samuelsson, J. (2016). Gender differences in boys’ and girls’ perception of teaching and learning mathematics. Open Review of Educational Research, 3(1), 18-34. DOI : 10.1080/23265507.2015.1127770
27. Santrock, J. W.(2003). Perkembangan remaja [Youth Development]. Edisi Keenam. Alih Bahasa: Dra.Sinto B, Adelar, M.Sc. Jakarta :Elangga.
28. Shadiq, F. (2004). Pemecahan masalah, penalaran dan komunikasi [Problem solving, reasoning and communication]. Yogyakarta: PPPG Matematika.
29. Shadiq, F. (2008). Empat objek langsung matematika menurut gagne [Four mathematical direct objects according to gagne]. [online]. http://fadjar3g.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/.
30. Sumpter, L. (2016). Investigating upper secondary school teachers’ conceptions: is mathematical reasoning considered gendered?. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(2), 347-362. DOI : 10.1007/s10763-015-9634-5
31. Susanah. (2017). Proses Penalaran mahasiswa dalam membuktikan kesebangunan segitiga ditinjau dari kemampuan matematika dan gender. Dissertation Not Published. Surabaya: PPs Universitas Negeri Surabaya
32. Soedjadi, R. (2000). Kiat pendidikan matematika di indonesia: konstatasi keadaan masa kini menuju harapan masa depan. Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Tinggi, Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.
33. Solazzo, L. A. (2008). The role of gender, cognition, anxiety, and competence beliefs in predicting mathematics achievement. Fordham University.
34. Umay, A. (2003). Mathematical reasoning ability. Hacettepe üniversitesi Egitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24, 234-243.
35. Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. L. (2017). Gender gap in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM): Current knowledge, implications for practice, policy, and future directions. Educational psychology review, 29(1), 119-140. DOI:10.1007/s10648-015-9355-x
36. Yildirim, S. (2000). Effects of an educational computing course on preservice and inservice teachers. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(4), 479–495. DOI:10.1080/08886504.2000.10782293
37. Zhu, Z. (2007). Gender differences in mathematical problem-solving patterns: A review of the literature. International Education Journal, 8(2), 187-203.