Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 1354 Download : 580

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

There is an ongoing research interest to disclose factors that influence problem-posing performance by involving cross-national backgrounds. This research extends that effort by conducting a comparative analysis on the performance of Indonesian and Hungarian prospective teachers in a problem-posing task. A total of eighty-three prospective teachers from Indonesia and Hungary were asked to pose a problem based on the current calendar. For more in-depth insights, an interview was conducted with a representative participant. The obtained data were analysed quantitatively using Fisher's exact test and qualitatively in nature. Their mathematical background seems to influence the characteristic of their proposed problem and the solution approach they utilized. The typical tasks proposed by Indonesian prospective teachers are exercise and mostly related to arithmetic operations, while those by Hungarian prospective teachers are challenging problems and generally connected to arithmetic sequences. Moreover, in solving their problems, Indonesians tend to show arithmetic reasoning while Hungarians often denote algebraic reasoning. These disparities might be attributed to the types of problems that each group typically encounters during their mathematics lessons.

Keywords

Cross-National Study Problem-Posing Problem-Solving Prospective Teacher

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Fitriana, L. D., Ekawati, R., & Kovács, Z. (2022). Perspectives on the problem-posing activity by prospective teachers: A cross-national study. Journal on Mathematics Education, 13(1), 149–172. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v13i1.pp149-172
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Bjork, C. (2005). Indonesian education: Teachers, schools, and central bureaucracy. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203959015
  2. Bonotto, C., & Santo, L. D. (2015). On the relationship between problem posing, problem solving, and creativity in the primary school. In Singer N. F. (Ed.), Mathematical problem posing (pp. 3-34). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6258-3_1
  3. Bóra, E. (2020). A computational thinking problem-thread for grade 7 students and above from the Pósa method. Teaching Mathematics and Computer Science, 18(3), 101-110. https://doi.org/10.5485/tmcs.2020.0480
  4. Boulton-Lewis, G., Cooper, T. J., Atweh, B., Pillay, H., & Wilss, L. (2000). Readiness for algebra. In T. Nakahra & M. Koyama (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 89-96). Hiroshima, Japan: PME
  5. Bradburn, N. M., & Gilford D. M. (1990). A framework and principles for international comparative studies in education. National Academy Press.
  6. Britt, M. S., & Irwin, K. C. (2008). Algebraic thinking with and without algebraic representation: A three-year longitudinal study. ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education, 40(1), 39-53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-007-0064-x
  7. Brown, S. I., & Walter, M. I. (2004). The art of problem posing: Third edition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410611833
  8. Cai, J. (1998). An investigation of U.S. and Chinese students’ mathematical problem posing and problem solving. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 10(1), 37-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217121
  9. Cai, J. (2000). Understanding and representing the arithmetic averaging algorithm: An analysis and comparison of U.S. and Chinese Students’ responses. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 31(6), 839-855. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207390050203342
  10. Cai, J., & Lester, F. (2007). Contributions from cross-national comparative studies to the internationalization of mathematics education: Studies of Chinese and U.S. classrooms. Internationalisation and Globalisation in Mathematics and Science Education, 269-283. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5908-7_15
  11. Cai, J., Hwang, S., Jiang, C., & Silber, S. (2015). Problem-posing research in mathematics education: Some answered and unanswered questions. In Singer N. F. (Ed.), Mathematical problem posing (pp. 3-34). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6258-3_1
  12. Carraher, D. W., Schliemann, A. D., Brizuela, B. M., & Earnest, D. (2006). Arithmetic and algebra in early mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37, 87–115. https://doi.org/10.2307/30034843
  13. Chapman, O. (2012). Prospective elementary school teachers’ ways of making sense of mathematical problem posing. PNA, 6(4), 135-146. https://doi.org/10.30827/pna.v6i4.6137
  14. Christidamayani, A. P., & Kristanto, Y. D. (2020). The effects of problem posing learning model on students’ learning achievement and motivation. Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education, 2(2), 100-108. https://doi.org/10.23917/ijolae.v2i2.9981
  15. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104
  16. Crespo, S. (2003). Learning to pose mathematical problems: Exploring changes in preservice teachers’ practices. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52(3), 243–270. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024364304664
  17. Crespo, S. (2015). A collection of problem-posing experiences for prospective mathematics teachers that make a difference. In Singer N. F. (Ed.), Mathematical problem posing (pp. 493-511). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6258-3_24
  18. Crespo, S., & Harper, F. K. (2020). Learning to pose collaborative mathematics problems with secondary prospective teachers. International Journal of Educational Research, 102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.05.003
  19. Crespo, S., & Sinclair, N. (2008). What makes a problem mathematically interesting? Inviting prospective teachers to pose better problems. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(5), 395-415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-008-9081-0
  20. da Ponte, J. P., & Henriques, A. (2013). Problem posing based on investigation activities by university students. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(1), 145-156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9443-5
  21. Duncker, K. (1945). On problem solving. Psychological Monograph, 58(5), i-113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0093599
  22. Ekawati, R., Fiangga, S., & Siswono, T. Y. E. (2018). Historical aspect of mathematics on Indonesian mathematics textbook. IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 434(012001), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/434/1/012001
  23. Ellerton, N. F. (1986). Children’s made-up mathematics problems: A new perspective on talented mathematicians. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 17(3), 261-271. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00305073
  24. Ellerton, N. F. (2013). Engaging pre-service middle-school teacher-education students in mathematical problem posing: Development of an active learning framework. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(1), 87–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9449-z
  25. English, L. D. (2020). Teaching and learning through mathematical problem posing: Commentary. International Journal of Educational Research, 102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.06.014
  26. Ernest, P. (1991). The philosophy of mathematics education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203497012
  27. Fauzan, A. (2002). Applying Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) in Teaching Geometry in Indonesian Primary Schools [Doctoral dissertation, University of Twente]. University of Twente Research Output. Retrieved from https://ris.utwente.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/6073228/thesis_Fauzan.pdf
  28. Fazekas, T., & Hraskó, A. (2006). Bergengóc példatár 1 [Bergengóc problem book]. Typotex.
  29. Filloy, E., & Rojano, T. (1989). Solving equations: The transition from arithmetic to algebra. For the Learning of Mathematics, 9, 19–25.
  30. Freudenthal, H. (1973). Mathematics as an Educational Task. Reidel. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2903-2.
  31. Freudenthal, H. (1977). What is algebra and what has it been in history? Archive for History of Exact Sciences, 16(3), 189–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00328154
  32. Friedlander, A., & Hershkowitz, R. (1997). Reasoning with algebra. The Mathematics Teacher, 90(6), 442-447. https://doi.org/10.2307/27970218
  33. Gallai, T., & Péter, R. (1949). Matematika a középiskolák I. osztálya számára [Mathematics for ninth graders]. Tankönyvkiadó Nemzeti Vállalat.
  34. Gosztonyi, K. (2016). Mathematical culture and mathematics education in Hungary in the XXth century. In Larvor B. (Ed.), Trends in the history of science (pp. 71-89). Springer International Publishing Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28582-5_5
  35. Győri, J. G., Fried, K., Köves, G., Oláh, V., & Pálfalvi, J. (2020). The traditions and contemporary characteristics of mathematics education in Hungary in the post-socialist era. In Karp A. (Ed.), Eastern European mathematics education in the decades of change: International studies in the history of mathematics and its teaching (pp. 75-129). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38744-0_3
  36. Halmos, M., & Varga, T. (1978). Change in mathematics education since the late 1950’s – Ideas and realisation Hungary. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 9(2), 225-244. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00221159
  37. Hasanah, N., Hayashi, Y., & Hirashima, T. (2017). Investigation of learning environment for arithmetic word problems by problem posing as sentence integration in Indonesian language. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 812(012060), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/812/1/012060
  38. Hohensee, C. (2017). Preparing elementary prospective teachers to teach early algebra. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 20, 231–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-015-9324-9
  39. Government Decree. (2012 & rev. 2020). A Nemzeti Alaptanterv Kiadasarol, Bevezetésérol és Alkalmazasarol 10/2012. (VI. 4) [On the Announcement, Introduction, and Application of the National Core Curriculum 10/2012. (VI. 4)]. Retrieved from http://net.jogtar.hu
  40. Hiebert, J. (1999). Relationship between research and the NCTM standards. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.2307/749627
  41. Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture. (2018). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia
  42. Nomor 37/2018 [Regulation of the Minister of Education and Culture of the Republic of Indonesia Number 37/2018]. Retrieved from https://jdih.kemdikbud.go.id.
  43. Juhász, P. (2019). Talent nurturing in Hungary: The Pósa weekend camps. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 66(6), 898–900. https://doi.org/10.1090/noti1887
  44. Kadir, K., Kodirun, Cahyono, E., Hadi, A. L., Sani, A., & Jafar. (2020). The ability of prospective teachers to pose contextual word problem about fractions addition. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1581(012025), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1581/1/012025
  45. Kaput, J. J. (2008). What is algebra? What is algebraic reasoning? In J. J. Kaput, D. W. Carraher, & M. L. Blanton, Algebra in the early grades. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315097435-2
  46. Kaput, J., & Blanton, M. (2001). Algebrafying the elementary mathematics experience Part 1. In H. Chick, K. Stacey, J. Vincent, & J. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th ICMI Study Conference (pp. 344-350). The University of Melbourne.
  47. Kilpatrick, J. (1987). Problem Formulating: Where do good problems come from. In Schoenfeld A. H. (Ed.), Cognitive sciences and mathematics education (pp. 123-147). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203062685
  48. Kovács, Z. (2017). Mathematics teacher trainees facing the “what-if-not” strategy - a case study. In A. Ambrus, & É. Vásárhelyi (Eds.), Problem solving in mathematics education, 68-81. Eötvös Loránd University.
  49. Kovács, Z. (2020). A study on evaluating prospective teachers' problem posing activity. Proceedings of the 14th International Congress on Mathematical Education, 7–10. East China Normal University.
  50. Kuipers, J. C. (2011). Education. In Frederick W. H., & Worden R. L. (Eds.), Indonesia: A Country Study (pp. 150-155). Federal Research Division.
  51. Leavy, A., & Hourigan, M. (2020). Posing mathematically worthwhile problems: Developing the problem-posing skills of prospective teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 23(4), 341–361. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-018-09425-w
  52. Leavy, A., & Hourigan, M. (2021). Balancing competing demands: Enhancing the mathematical problem posing skills of prospective teachers through a mathematical letter writing initiative. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-021-09490-8
  53. Leikin, R., & Elgrably, H. (2020). Problem posing through investigations for the development and evaluation of proof-related skills and creativity skills of prospective high school mathematics teachers. International Journal of Educational Research, 102(April), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.04.002
  54. Leung, S. -k. (2013). Teachers implementing mathematical problem posing in the classroom: Challenges and strategies. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(1), 103-116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9436-4
  55. Mailizar, M., Alafaleq, M., & Fan, L. (2014). A historical overview of mathematics curriculum reform and development in modern Indonesia. Inovacije U Nastavi, 27(3), 58-68. https://doi.org/10.5937/inovacije1403058m
  56. Mason, J. (2011). Commentary on part III. In J. Cai & E. Knuth (Eds.), Early algebraization: A global dialogue from multiple perspectives (pp. 557–577). Springer.
  57. Masriyah, M., Kurniasari, K., & Palupi, E. L. W. (2018). Characteristics of pre-service teachers’ performance in problem posing. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1088(012115), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1088/1/012115
  58. Mukminin, A., Habibi, A., Prasojo, L. D., Idi, A., & Hamidah, A. (2019). Curriculum reform in Indonesia: Moving from an exclusive to inclusive curriculum. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 9(2), 53–72. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.543
  59. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. NCTM.
  60. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2015). Education in Indonesia: Rising to the Challenge. OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264230750-en
  61. Osana, H. P., & Pelczer, I. (2015). A review on problem posing in teacher education. In Singer N. F. (Ed.), Mathematical problem posing: From research to effective practice (pp. 469-492). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6258-3_23
  62. Papadopoulos, I., Patsiala, N., Baumanns, L., & Rott, B. (2021). Multiple approaches to problem posing: Theoretical considerations regarding its definition, conceptualisation, and implementation. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.878
  63. Pehkonen, E. (1997). Introduction to the concept "open-ended problem". In E. Pehkonen (Ed.), Use of open-ended problems in mathematics classroom. University of Helsinki.
  64. Pólya, G. (1945). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Princeton University Press.
  65. Pólya, G. (1954). Mathematics and plausible reasoning. Princeton University Press.
  66. Pólya, G. (1962). Mathematical discovery. John Wiley & Sons Inc.
  67. Pillay, H., Wilss, L., & Boulton-Lewis, G. (1998). Sequential development of algebra knowledge: A cognitive analysis. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 10(2), 87-102. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217344
  68. Powell, S. R., Kearns, D. M., & Driver, M. K. (2016). Exploring the connection between arithmetic and prealgebraic reasoning at first and second grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(7), 943–959. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000112
  69. Rosser, A. (2018). Beyond access: Making Indonesia’s education system work. Lowy Institute for International Policy.
  70. Schliemann, A. D., Carraher, D. W., & Brizuela, B. M. (2006). Bringing out the algebraic character of arithmetic: From children’s ideas to classroom practice. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203827192
  71. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2008). Early algebra as mathematical sense making. In Kaput J. J., Carraher D. W., & Blanton M. L. (Eds.), Algebra in the early grades. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315097435-21
  72. Silver, E. (1994). On mathematical problem posing. For the Learning of Mathematics, 14(1), 19-28.
  73. Silver, E. A. (2013). Problem-Posing Research in Mathematics Education: Looking Back, Looking Around, and Looking Ahead. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(1), 157-162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9477-3
  74. Silver, E. A., & Cai, J. (1996). An analysis of arithmetic problem posing by middle school students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(5), 521-539. https://doi.org/10.2307/749846
  75. Singer, F. M., Ellerton, N., & Cai, J. (2013). Problem-posing research in mathematics education: New questions and directions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9478-2
  76. Sprent, P. (2011). Fisher exact test. In Lovric M. (Ed.), International encyclopedia of statistical science (pp. 524-525). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04898-2_253
  77. Stoyanova, E. (1997). Extending Students’ Problem Solving Via Problem Posing [Doctoral dissertation, Edith Cowan University]. Edith Cowan University Research Online. https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/885/
  78. Stoyanova, E., & Ellerton, N. F. (1996). A framework for research into students’ problem posing in school mathematics. In Clarkson P. (Ed.), Technology in mathematics education (pp. 518–525). Melbourne: Mathematics Education Research Group of Australia.
  79. Tabach, M., & Friedlander, A. (2013). School mathematics and creativity at the elementary and middle-grade levels: how are they related? ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(2), 227-238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0471-5
  80. Tanujaya, B., Prahmana, R. C. I., & Mumu, J. (2017). Mathematics instruction, problems, challenges and opportunities: A case study in Manokwari regency, Indonesia. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 15(3), 287-291.
  81. Tichá, M., & Hošpesová, A. (2013). Developing teachers’ subject didactic competence through problem posing. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9455-1
  82. Varga, T. (1987). Az Egyszeregy Körül [Around the Multiplication Table]. Kritika. Művelődéspolitikai és Kritikai Lap, 12, 28-31.
  83. Varga, T. (1988). Mathematics education in Hungary today. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 19(3), 291-298. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00312449
  84. Wahyudin, D., & Suwirta, A. (2017). The curriculum implementation for cross-cultural and global citizenship education in Indonesia schools. Educare, 10(1), 11–22.

Most read articles by the same author(s)