Konstruksi makna pada simbol matematika dalam perspektif semiotika
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22460/jpmi.v7i5.22532Keywords:
Meaning Construction, Semiotics, SymbolAbstract
The Semiotic process (construction of sign meaning) is very closely related to mathematics which consists of signs or symbols. This research aims to explore students' semiotic processes in constructing the meaning of symbols in whole numbers. This research is a qualitative descriptive research using a semiotic approach. The subjects in this research were selected using purposive sampling (purposeful sampling). The subjects in this research were 32 elementary school students. Based on this research, 5 types of semiotic construction patterns were obtained with each subject grouped based on its semiotic construction, namely 1) strong semiotic construction, 2) weak semiosis construction, 3) True-False semiotic construction, 4) False-True semiotic construction, and 5) False-False semiotic construction. The semiosis construction process is a determining factor in students understanding the signs of operations in integers.
References
Alshwaikh, J. (2010). Geometrical diagrams as representation and communication: A functional analytic framework. Research in Mathematics Education, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/14794800903569881
Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. D., & Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View, ˮ,(Holt, Rinehart and Winston; New York, NY).
Bautista, A., & Roth, W.-M. (2012). Conceptualizing sound as a form of incarnate mathematical consciousness. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79, 41–59.
Benny, H. H. (2011). Semiotik dan dinamika sosial budaya. Jakarta: Komunitas Bambu.
Berger, M. (2006). Making mathematical meaning: from preconcepts to pseudoconcepts to concepts. Pythagoras, 2006(63), 14–21.
Bezemer, J., Jewitt, C., Diamantopoulou, S., Kress, G., & Mavers, D. (2012). Using a social semiotic approach to multimodality: Researching learning in schools, museums and hospitals.
Cetin, H. (2019). Explaining the concept and operations of integer in primary school mathematics teaching: Opposite model sample. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(2), 365–370. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2019.070208
Cobb, P. (1988). The tension between theories of learning and instruction in mathematics education. Educational Psychologist, 23(2), 87–103.
Daher, W. M. (2014). Manipulatives and problem situations as escalators for students’ geometric understanding: a semiotic analysis. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 45(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2013.837527
de Freitas, E., & Sinclair, N. (2013). New materialist ontologies in mathematics education: The body in/of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83, 453–470.
Dimmel, J. K., & Herbst, P. G. (2015). The semiotic structure of geometry diagrams: How textbook diagrams convey meaning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 46(2), 147–195. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.46.2.0147
Duval, R. (2017). Understanding the mathematical way of thinking - The registers of semiotic representations. In Understanding the Mathematical Way of Thinking - The Registers of Semiotic Representations. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56910-9
Eco, U., & Marmo, C. (1989). On the Medieval Theory of Signs. Foundations of Semiotics, v. 21, ix, 224.
Eichhorn, M. S., Perry, L. E., & Brombacher, A. (2018). Students’ early grade understanding of the equal sign and non-standard equations in Jordan and India. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 4(2), 655–669. https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.432520
Font, V., Godino, J. D., & Gallardo, J. (2013). The emergence of objects from mathematical practices. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82, 97–124.
Gagne, R. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction Robert Gagné. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart Ja Winston.
Godino, J. D., Font, V., Wilhelmi, M. R., & Lurduy, O. (2011). Why is the learning of elementary arithmetic concepts difficult? Semiotic tools for understanding the nature of mathematical objects. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 77(2–3), 247–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9278-x
Goldin, G. A. (1998). Representations and the psychology of mathematics education: part II. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 2(17), 135.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning (Vol. 42). Edward Arnold London.
Ibda, F. (2015). Perkembangan kognitif: teori jean piaget. Intelektualita, 3(1).
Miller, J. (2015). Young Indigenous Students’ Engagement with Growing Pattern Tasks: A Semiotic Perspective. Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.
Moore-Russo, D., Viglietti, J. M., Chiu, M. M., & Bateman, S. M. (2013). Teachers’ spatial literacy as visualization, reasoning, and communication. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 97–109.
Mudaly, V. (2014). A visualisation-based semiotic analysis of learners’ conceptual understanding of graphical functional relationships. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10288457.2014.889789
Palayukan, H., Purwanto, Subanji, & Sisworo. (2020). Student’s semiotics in solving problems geometric diagram viewed from peirce perspective. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2215, 060020. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0000719
Palayukan, H. (2022). Proses semiotik (semiosis) siswa dalam mengonstruksi konsep bilangan bulat (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Negeri Malang).
Palayukan, H., & Purwanto, S. (2022). Semiotics in Integers: How Can the Semiosis Connections Occur in Problem Solving? Webology, 19(2), 98–111.
Palayukan, H., Lembang, S. T., Situru, A. G., Rapa, S. D., & Heri, H. (2023). Analisis semiotik: representamen siswa dalam menyelesaikan operasi bilangan bulat. JPMI (Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Inovatif), 6(4), 1699-1708.
Peirce, C. S. (1991). Peirce on signs: Writings on semiotic. UNC Press Books.
Pino-Fan, L. R., Guzmán, I., Font, V., & Duval, R. (2017). Analysis of the underlying cognitive. In PNA (Vol. 11, Issue 2).
Presmeg, N., Radford, L., Roth, W.-M., & Kadunz, G. (2016). Semiotics in Mathematics Education ICME-13 Topical Surveys. http://www.springer.com/series/14352
Quinnell, L., & Carter, M. L. (2012). Greek or not: The use of symbols and abbreviations in mathematics. Autralian Mathematics Teacher, 68(2), 34–41.
Radford, L. (2009). Why do gestures matter? Sensuous cognition and the palpability of mathematical meanings. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(2), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9127-3
Roth, W.-M. (2010). Incarnation: Radicalizing the embodiment of mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 30(2), 8–17.
Schreiber, C. (2013). Semiotic processes in chat-based problem-solving situations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82(1), 51–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9417-7
Shreyar, S., Zolkower, B., & Pérez, S. (2010). Thinking aloud together: A teacher’s semiotic mediation of a whole-class conversation about percents. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 73, 21–53.
Subanji, S., & Nusantara, T. (2016). Thinking Process of Pseudo Construction in Mathematics Concepts. International Education Studies, 9(2), 17. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n2p17
Torigoe, E. T., & Gladding, G. E. (2011). Connecting symbolic difficulties with failure in physics. American Journal of Physics, 79(1), 133–140. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.3487941
Vergnaud, G. (1985). Concepts et schèmes dans une théorie opératoire de la représentation.
Vile, A. (1993). Is this a sign of the times? A semiotic approach to meaningmaking in mathematics education. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press.
Yakin, H. S. Mohd., & Totu, A. (2014). The Semiotic Perspectives of Peirce and Saussure: A Brief Comparative Study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 155(October), 4–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.10.247
Zolkower, B., & de Freitas, E. (2012). Mathematical meaning-making in whole-class conversation: Functional-grammatical analysis of a paradigmatic text. Language and Dialogue, 2(1), 60–79.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The author is responsible for acquiring the permission(s) to reproduce any copyrighted figures, tables, data, or text that are being used in the submitted paper. Authors should note that text quotations of more than 250 words from a published or copyrighted work will require grant of permission from the original publisher to reprint. The written permission letter(s) must be submitted together with the manuscript.