Improvement Students’ Level of Proof Ability in Abstract Algebra Trough APOS Theory Approach
[Full Text]
AUTHOR(S)
I Made Arnawa, Yerizon, Sri Nita
KEYWORDS
Proof ability, APOS theory, Abstract algebra, Preexperiment, One shot case study design
ABSTRACT
This study intends to improve students’ proof ability in abstract algebra course based on teaching and learning through APOS theory approach and to know level of students understanding in abstract algebra. This research is preexperiment one shot case study design. The sample were the students who participating in the abstract algebra course academic year 2018/2019 at Andalas University. Instrument used in this study was test of proof ability which consisted of three proof test, that measures the ability of proof construction. Level of students’ ability in proofs are grouped into three categories, namely: level 1 (sintactic), level 2 (concrete semantics), and level 3 (abstract semantics). The results showed that: (1) 30% of students achieved level 3, 50% of students achieved level 2, 14% of students achieved level 1, 3% of students achieved level 0 and 3% excluding the category of level 0, level 1, level 2, and level 3. (2) Most of student have difficulty in learning Abstract Algebra, (3) The students trained with teaching and learning based on APOS theory approach had the mean score of the ability to proof different from 45.00 at the significant level of .05. (4) There a gender gap in students ability to proof in Abstract Algebra, but statisticcally not significant.
REFERENCES
[1]. Stylianides, G.J. &. Stylianides, A.J. (2008). Proof in School Mathematics: Insights from Psychological Research into Students' Ability for Deductive Reasoning. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 10(2): 103133.
[2]. Hersh, R. (1993). Proving is convincing and explaining. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24(4): 38999.
[3]. De Villiers, M. (1990). The role and function of proof in mathematics. Pythagoras, 24:1724.
[4]. Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (1998). Students' proof schemes: Results from an exploratory study. In A. H. Schoenfeld, J. Kaput & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), Research in collegiate mathematics education (3rd ed., pp. 234283). Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.
[5]. Inglis, M., & Alcock, L.(2012). Expert and novice approaches to reading mathematical proofs, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43(4), 358390.
[6]. Moore, R. C. (1994). Making the transition to formal proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics. 27(3), 24966.
[7]. Selden, A., & Selden, J. (2003). Validations of proofs considered as texts: Can undergraduates tell whether an argument proves a theorem? Jour. for Research in Mathematics Education, 34(1), 436.
[8]. Selden, A., & Selden, J. (2015). Validations of proofs as a type of reading and sensemaking. In K. Beswick, T. Muir, & J. Wells (Eds.), Proc. of the 39th Conf, of PME, Vol. 4, 145152.
[9]. MejiaRamos, J. P., Fuller, E., Weber, K., Rhoads, K., & Samkoff, A. (2012). An assessment model for proof comprehension in undergraduate mathematics. Educ. Studies in Mathematics, 79(1): 318.
[10]. Selden, A., & Selden, J. (2003). Validations of proofs considered as texts: Can undergraduates tell whether an argument proves a theorem? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34(1): 436.
[11]. Pfeiffer, K. (2011). Features and purposes of mathematical proofs in the view of novice students: Observations from proof validation and evaluation performances. Doctoral dissertation, National University of Ireland, Galway.
[12]. Isnarto, Wahyudin, Suryadi, D. & Dahlan, J.A. (2014). Students’ Proof Ability: Exploratory Studies of Abstract Algebra Course. International Journal of Education and Research. 2(6): 215228.
[13]. Paisal, K. (2015). Learning Activities that Promote Ability the Proof Groups using the Internet Network. Procedia  Social and Behavioral Sciences 197:1661–1664.
[14]. Hart, E.W. (1994). A Conceptual Analysis of The ProofWriting Performance of Expert and Novice Students in Elementary Group Theory. In J.J. Kaput & Ed Dubinsky (Ed.). Research Issues in Undergraduate Mathematics Learning. Washington: The Mathematical Association of America.
[15]. Dubinsky E. & Mcdonald, M.A. (2001) APOS: A Constructivist Theory of Learning in Undergraduate Mathematics Education Research. In: Holton D., Artigue M., Kirchgräber U., Hillel J., Niss M., Schoenfeld A. (eds) The Teaching and Learning of Mathematics at University Level. New ICMI Study Series, vol 7. Springer, Dordrecht.
[16]. Robinson, J.P.& Lubienski, S.T. (2011). The Development of Gender Achievement Gaps in Mathematics and Reading During Elementary and Middle School: Examining Direct Cognitive Assessments and Teacher Ratings. American Educational Research Journal. 48(2): 268–302.
[17]. Zhu. Z. (2007). Gender differences in mathematical problem solving patterns: A review of literature. International Education Journal, 8(2), 187203.
[18]. Goni, U., Yagana, W.S.B., Ali, H.K., & Bularafa, M.W. (2015). Gender Difference in Students’ Academic Performance in Colleges of Education in Borno State, Nigeria: Implications for Counselling. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(32):107114.
[19]. Contini,D., Tommaso, M.L.D., & Mendolia, S. (20017) The gender gap in mathematics achievement: Evidence from Italian data. Economics of Education Review, 58:3242.
[20]. Syaiful, Marsal,J. & Kamid (2016). Development of Student Comprhension In Constructing Line And Row: Analyzed from Apos Theory. ASIO Journal of Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics & Applied Sciences (ASIOJCPMAS)1(2): 59.
[21]. Maharaj, A. (2010). An APOS Analysis of Students’ Understanding of the Concept of a Limit of a Function. Pythagoras, 71: 4152.
