Students’ Mathematical Literacy Skills in Terms of Learning Styles

Shinta Alfiatu Nadila; Herani Tri Lestiana

doi:10.22437/edumatica.v14i3.38303

Authors

Shinta Alfiatu Nadila UIN Siber Syekh Nurjati
Herani Tri Lestiana UIN Siber Syekh Nurjati

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22437/edumatica.v14i3.38303

Keywords:

learning style, mathematical literacy skills, two-variable linear equation system

Abstract

The results of the OECD-PISA state that the mathematical literacy skills of students in Indonesia are still relatively low. The objectives of this study are: 1) To analyze students' mathematical literacy skills in solving Two-Variable Linear Equation System (SPLDV) problems in terms of student learning styles; 2) To find out the factors causing the less than optimal mathematical literacy skills. The method used in this study is descriptive qualitative. The study subjects were 23 students in grade VIII at SMPN 1 Beber with 9 students interviewed, namely 3 students with a visual learning style, 3 students with an auditory learning style, and 3 students with a kinesthetic learning style. Assessment of mathematical literacy skills is based on 3 indicators of mathematical literacy skills: formulate, employ, and interpret. The results of this study indicate that: 1) In solving SPLDV problems, the mathematical literacy skills of students with an auditory learning style are better than those with other learning styles; 2) The factors causing the less than optimal mathematical literacy skills are personal factors and instructional factors.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ahyansyah, A. (2019). Kemampuan Literasi Matematika Siswa Sekolah Dasar Ditinjau dari Gaya Belajar. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Lembaga Penelitian Dan Pendidikan (LPP) Mandala.

Amaliya, I., & Fathurohman, I. (2022). Analisis Kemampuan Literasi Matematika Ditinjau dari Gaya Belajar Siswa SDN Mangunjiwan 1 Demak. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Dasar, 5(1).

Cuevas, J. (2015). Is Learning Styles-Based Instruction Effective? A Comprehensive Analysis of Recent Research on Learning Styles. Theory and Research in Education, 13(3), 308–333. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878515606621

Dewi, S. A., & Hasanah, H. U. (2020). The Comparison between Visual Learners and Kinesthetic Learners in Reading Comprehension at the Eleventh Grade Students of SMA Negeri 2 Pamekasan. PANYONARA: Journal of English Education, 2(1), 61. https://doi.org/10.19105/panyonara.v2i1.3151

Edimuslim, E., Edriati, S., & Mardiyah, A. (2019). Analisis Kemampuan Literasi Matematika ditinjau dari Gaya Belajar Siswa SMA. Suska Journal of Mathematics Education, 5(2), 95. https://doi.org/10.24014/sjme.v5i2.8055

Fitria, T. N. (2023). Implementation of English Language Teaching (ELT) Through Understanding Non-EFL Students’ Learning Styles. Education and Human Development Journal, 8(1), 10–25. https://doi.org/10.33086/ehdj.v8i1.4457

Ishartono, N., Faiziyah, N., Sutarni, S., Putri, A. B., Fatmasari, L. W. S., Sayuti, M., Rahmaniati, R., & Yunus, M. M. (2021). Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Students: How They Solve PISA-Oriented Mathematics Problems? Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1720(1), 012012. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1720/1/012012

Jaenudin, J., Nindiasari, H., & Pamungkas, A. S. (2017). Analisis Kemampuan Berpikir Reflektif Matematis Siswa Ditinjau dari Gaya Belajar. Prima: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 1(1), 69. https://doi.org/10.31000/prima.v1i1.256

Lopez, D. M., & Schroeder, L. (2008). Designing Strategies That Meet the Variety of Learning Styles. Online Submission, May. http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED500848

Masfufah, R., & Afriansyah, E. A. (2021). Analisis Kemampuan Literasi Matematis Siswa melalui Soal PISA. Mosharafa: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 10(2), 291–300. https://doi.org/10.31980/mosharafa.v10i2.825

Masfufah, R., & Afriansyah, E. A. (2022). Analisis Kemampuan Literasi Matematis Ditinjau dari Gaya Belajar Siswa SMP pada Pembelajaran Daring. PERISAI: Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Riset Ilmu Sains, 1(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.32672/perisai.v1i1.52

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Drawing Valid Meaning from Qualitative Data: Toward a Shared Craft. Educational Researcher, 13(5), 20–30. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X013005020

NCTM. (2020). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. The Arithmetic Teacher, 29(5), 59. https://doi.org/10.5951/at.29.5.0059

Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x

Rismen, S., Putri, W., & Jufri, L. H. (2022). Kemampuan Literasi Matematika Ditinjau dari Gaya Belajar. Jurnal Cendekia : Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 6(1), 348–364. https://doi.org/10.31004/cendekia.v6i1.1093

Rivai, A. (2022). Analisis Kemampuan Literasi Matematika Peserta Didik dalam Menyelesaikan Soal PISA Ditinjau dari Gaya Belajar di SMP Negeri 1 Palopo. Institut Agama Islam Negeri (IAIN) Palopo.

Sabrina, D. A. P., Puspadewi, K. R., & Noviyanti, P. L. (2023). Analisis Kemampuan Literasi Matematika pada Siswa SMP Kelas IX dalam Menyelesaikan Soal Tipe PISA. Jurnal Santiaji Pendidikan (JSP), 13(2), 129–141. https://doi.org/10.36733/jsp.v13i2.7052

Schleicher, A., Zimmer, K., Evans, J., & Clements, N. (2009). PISA 2009 Assessment Framework. Key competencies in reading, mathematics and science. Assessment, 20(8).

Sitopu, J. W., Khairani, M., Roza, M., Judijanto, L., & Aslan. (2024). The Importance of Integrating Mathematical Literacy in the Primary Education Curriculum : a Literature Review. Journal of Information Systems and Management (JISMA), 2(1).

Sugiyono. (2018). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitiatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.

Syawahid, M., & Putrawangsa, S. (2017). Kemampuan Literasi Matematika Siswa SMP Ditinjau dari Gaya Belajar. Beta: Jurnal Tadris Matematika, 10(2), 222–240. https://doi.org/10.20414/betajtm.v10i2.121

Willingham, D. T., Hughes, E. M., & Dobolyi, D. G. (2015). The Scientific Status of Learning Styles Theories. Teaching of Psychology, 42(3), 266–271. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628315589505