Dinda Nuraini, Rika Sukmawati, Sigit Raharjo, Shinta Aristy

Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Matematis Siswa Berdasarkan Efikasi Diri Pada Materi Bangun Ruang Sisi Datar

Introduction

Kemampuan berpikir kritis matematis siswa berdasarkan efikasi diri pada materi bangun ruang sisi datar. Kaji kemampuan berpikir kritis matematis siswa pada bangun ruang sisi datar berdasarkan efikasi diri. Pahami hubungan tingkat efikasi diri dengan analisis dan pemecahan masalah matematika.

Abstract

This research aims to examine students' mathematical critical thinking abilities based on self-efficacy in flat-sided geometric material and students are expected to be able to have self-confidence in analyzing and solving problems critically. The research was conducted at Kafah Unggul Islamic High School, Tangerang City, with research subjects selected from 6 students from 14 class X Science students. The method used in this research is descriptive qualitative. The data analysis technique obtained through filling out a questionnaire regarding self-efficacy was analyzed using low, medium and high criteria and continued with a written test in the form of description questions with flat-sided geometric material and interviews. Based on the research results, it can be seen that the category level of students who have high self-efficacy is 25%. The largest category is 58.33% with moderate self-efficacy and the smallest is 16.66% in the low self-efficacy category which is caused by several factors, such as experiencing difficulties when analyzing and determining the formula to use according to the question.

Review

This study investigates the mathematical critical thinking abilities of students in flat-sided geometric material, specifically in relation to their self-efficacy. The aim to explore this relationship is commendable, as both critical thinking and self-efficacy are crucial constructs in mathematics education. The use of a descriptive qualitative approach, incorporating questionnaires, written tests, and interviews, suggests an attempt to gather rich, multi-faceted data. The topic is relevant to educational practitioners seeking to understand factors influencing student performance and confidence in complex mathematical tasks. However, the methodology and reported findings present several significant concerns. The most striking limitation is the extremely small sample size, consisting of only 6 students selected from a class of 14. This raises serious questions about the generalizability and robustness of any conclusions drawn, even within a qualitative framework, especially when quantitative percentages (25% high, 58.33% moderate, 16.66% low self-efficacy) are reported based on such a tiny group. The abstract does not sufficiently explain the selection criteria for these 6 students, which is critical for a qualitative study. Furthermore, while the research aims to "examine students' mathematical critical thinking abilities based on self-efficacy," the reported results primarily describe the distribution of self-efficacy categories and attribute low self-efficacy to factors like difficulty in analyzing and determining formulas. It is unclear how the *critical thinking abilities* were categorized and how these categories were directly correlated or analyzed in conjunction with the self-efficacy levels, which was the stated purpose. For future iterations or a revised manuscript, the authors should significantly expand the sample size to provide more credible insights. A clearer articulation of the qualitative data analysis process for both critical thinking and self-efficacy, and how these two constructs were systematically linked and interpreted, is essential. The paper would benefit from a detailed explanation of how critical thinking abilities were assessed from the written tests and interviews, and how these assessments were then cross-referenced with the self-efficacy levels. Strengthening the discussion to explicitly address the *relationship* between critical thinking and self-efficacy, rather than just describing the prevalence of self-efficacy levels, would greatly enhance the study's contribution.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.