ICOMSET Mathematics Education

PROFILE ABILITY THINK CRITICALLY STUDENT IN COMPLETING

MATHEMATICAL PROBLEMS BASED ON THE LEVEL OF ACADEMIC ABILITY

Zetriuslita1*, Rezi Ariawan2, Hayatun Nufus3

1
Student of Postgraduate Program Studies of Indonesia University of Education
2,3
Lecturer Mathematics Education Riau Islamic University
zetri.lita@gmail.com, ariawanrezi@rocketmail.com, ya2tunnufus@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

This research aims to describe profile ability think critically student in completing mathematical problems
based on the level of academic ability. Subject in this research are students of the 2nd semester on 2014/2015
academic year who studied at mathematics education of FKIP UIR Pekanbaru who was following lectured
Calculus 2. The subject divided by three groups namely students with high skill level, medium and low level.
This classification based on value obtained student on the lecture calculus 1. The techniques of collection data in
this research is using test and interview. Based on the results of research known that: (1) students on the high
level group are generally have good enough the ability to generalize, but have less capability to identified and
justified the concept and analyzes algorithms; (2) studens on the medium level group have capability of being in
general afford to identified and justified the concept, generalize, and analyzes algorithms; (3) students on the low
level group are not capable to identified and justified the concepts of, generalize, and analyzes algorithms.
Index Terms: Critical Thinking Ability Profile, Calculus 2, Level of Academic Ability.

1. INTRODUCTION and train someone to do (doing the math) in the

1.1 Background
In each of Indonesia's national education
curriculum, mathematics courses are always taught
every level of education, not least in college. This
indicates that it is expected to learn mathematics, the
availability of Indonesian human resources that are
reliable, that is capable of critical thinking,
systematic, logical, creative and careful can be
fulfilled. One important aspect in mathematics is the
ability to think critically. This is in line with what is
recommended by the Committee on the Undergroude
Program in Mathematics in Karlimah (2010: 2) that
"the six basic recommendations for the department,
programs, and courses in mathematics. One
recommendation explains that each course in
mathematics should be an activity that will assist
students in the development of analytical, critical
reasoning, problem solving, and communication
skills.
Klurik and Rudnick (Sabandar, 2008) states that
included critical thinking in mathematics is thought
that test, questioning, connecting, evaluating all
aspects of the situation or a problem. Based on the
opinion and Rudnick Klurik above, it can be stated
that the critical thinking skills, the students will
become more curious because of the encouragement
of curiosity and a desire to obtain the truth. Critical
thinking habits improve mathematical abilities of
students, because the students are encouraged to
perform a variety of activities, such as face many
challenges in learning, finding new things, and
resolving the problems of non-routine.
Based on the above statement, it can be
concluded that the critical thinking skills can create
learning of mathematics.
1.2 Problem’s Formulation
Based on the above background, the formulation
of the problem in this research is: How is Profile
Student Critical Thinking Ability in Solving
Mathematics Subjects Calculus 2 Based on Academic
Ability Levels?
2. RESEARCH METHOD
A study started from a problem or research
question to answer and end the problems in question.
If the answer to the problems in the form of a
narrative qualitative depiction of the state of
something in question, then the study is expressed as
a descriptive study. Through a qualitative approach in
this study, the facts either orally or in writing from a
human source who has observed and other relevant
documents described what it is and to then be studied
and presented as possible to answer research
questions. This research is descriptive research with a
qualitative approach.
3. RESEARCH SUBJECTS
Subjects in this study were students of second
semester of academic year 2014/2015 Mathematics
Education Study Program FKIP UIR Pekanbaru who
are following a course of calculus 2. The selection of
this subject is based on several considerations,
namely: (a) the second semester students have
received course calculus 1 , so that it can be said they
are already qualified to learn calculus 2; (b) the
student is interviewed, because researchers are faculty

Copyright FMIPA UNP © 2015 56

ISBN 978-602-19877-3-5
ICOMSET
of the student. Subjects were divided into three
groups: students with high ability level, medium and
low. This grouping is based on values obtained by
students in the course of calculus 1
4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Collecting data in this study conducted in room
A6.09 - A6.14 Campus FKIP UIR Pekanbaru on 11-
13 May 2015 at 09:00 to 12:00 hours GMT. After the
research subjects working on sheet instruments
critical thinking mathematically, then researchers
determined the subject to be interviewed based on
their level of academic ability. Once the interview
process is complete, the researchers conducted an
analysis of research data.
Data analysis is done by exposing research
subjects answer in writing and then continued by
presenting the results of research interviews with the
subject. Finally, researchers will carry out the results
of triangulation of data that have been obtained.
Based on three indicators of critical thinking
skills that researchers use in this study, which are: (1)
the ability to identify and justify the concept, namely
the ability to give a reason to the mastery of concepts;
(2) the ability to generalize, namely the ability to
supplement the data or information support; (3) the
ability to analyze the algorithm, namely the ability to
evaluate or examine an algorithm, this study showed
that subjects who are at high-level academic skills
almost all have the ability to generalize, namely the
ability to supplement the data or information in
support. Furthermore, only a fraction of the subject at
a high academic ability who have the ability to
identify and justify the concept. While nearly all
subjects at high academic abilities could not finish the
three test questions for the indicator. This means that
most of the subjects on the high academic ability can
be said not to have the ability to analyze the
algorithm.
Table 1. Profile Student Critical Thinking Ability in Solving Mathematics in Calculus II Course Based on
Level of Academic Ability
Indikator Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis
The ability to identify
andjustify the concept,
Ability level
namely the ability to
give a reason to the the data or information
mastery of concepts
A small portion subjectis
able to draw a sketch
graph quadratic
functions, consequently
Height the subject is difficult to
define the upper and
lower limits are used to
calculate the are
arequested.
Medium Almost all subjects can
Copyright FMIPA UNP © 2015
ISBN 978-602-19877-3-5
Mathematics Education
Based on interviews with subjects which
researchers have found that the high ability of almost
any subject can express and understand and be able to
work on the problems test for indicator no. 2 or
indicator of the ability to generalize, while the
indicator no. 1 or the ability to identify and justify the
concept, based on interviews showed that subjects on
a high academic ability majority can not design a
parabolic curve that intersects with the plot line and
the y-axis, consequently they are wrong in
determining the limits of the integral are used to
determine the extent. Furthermore, based on
interviews found that subjects on a high academic
ability can not analyze the given problem, because
most subjects at high academic ability forgotten the
integral concept of trigonometric functions.
To the subject in academic ability being, only a
fraction subjects were able to generalize or
supplement the data or information in support. As for
the ability to identify and justify the concept and the
ability to analyze algorithm, almost all subjects in
academic ability was not. Based on the results of
research interviews with the subject, it was found that
almost all of the subject does not have the
understanding to identify and justify the concept and
analysis algorithms.
Furthermore, to a subject in low academic
ability, almost all of them are not able to complete all
the test questions were given. This indicates that the
subjects on the low academic ability in general do not
have the ability to identify and justify the concept, the
ability to generalize the algorithm as well as the
ability to analyze the algorithm. Based on interviews
with the researchers on the ability of low academic
subjects, it was found that almost all of them do not
know how to solve the given test. This indicates that
the subject in low academic ability do not yet have an
understanding to resolve.For more details, the results
of the analysis of critical thinking skills profiles based
on the ability of academic subjects are presented in
Table 1 below
The abilityto The ability to analyze
generalize, namely the the algorithm, namely
ability to supplement the ability to evaluate
or examine an
that supports algorithm
Almost all subjects Almost all subjects can
capable of and not analyze and evaluate
understand the given and provide
problem and solve it improvements to the
properly existing problems
because they forget the
integral concept of
trigonometric functions
A small portion subject Almost all subjects can
57
ICOMSET Mathematics Education

not describe sketch is able to doa not do the analysis and

quadratic function graph, generalization, because providean evaluation of
because they do not the subject does not the algorithm are given
understand understand how to because they do not
generalize understand the concepts
that will be used.
Almost all subjects can Almost all subjects can Almost all subjects can
not describe sketch not generalize the not do the analysis and
quadratic function graph, algorithm because they provide an evaluation of
Low because they do not do not understand how to the algorithm are given
understand solve the problem given because they do not
understand the concepts
that will be used.
[5] Karlimah, Mengembangkan Kemampuan Komunikasi
5. CONCLUSIONS dan Pemecahan Masalah serta Disposisi Matematis
Mahasiswa PGSD melalui Pembelajaran Berbasis
Overall, the study subjects at a high level of Masalah, Disertasi pada SPs UPI: Tidak diterbitkan,
academic ability in general have the ability to Bandung, 2010.
generalize fairly well, but are less able to identify and
[6] Lipman, M, Thinking in Education. Cambridge
justify the concept and analyze algorithms. While the University Press, New York, 2003.
subject at the level of academic ability were, in
general, are less able to identify and justify the
concept, generalize the algorithm, and analyzing [7] Sabandar, J, Berpikir Reflektif. Makalah disampaikan
pada Seminar Nasional Sehari: Permasalahan
algorithms. Further to the subject at a low level of
Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika Terkini:
academic ability, are generally not able to identify tanggal 8 Desember 2007 : Tidak diterbitkan, UPI
and justify the concept, generalize the algorithm, and Bandung, 2007.
analyzing algorithms.
[8] Santrock, J.W, Adolescence, Mc-Graw-Hill, Inc,
London, 1997.
6. REFERENCE
[9] Somakim, Peningkatan Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis
[1] Depdiknas, Kurikulum 2006 Standar Isi Mata dan Self-Efficacy Matematik Siswa Sekolah
Pelajaran Matematika, Depdiknas, Jakarta, 2006. Menengah Pertama dengan Penggunaan Pendekatan
Matematika Realistik. Disertasi pada SPs UPI: Tidak
[2] Erman Suherman, dkk, Strategi Pembelajaran diterbitkan, Bandung, 2010.
Matematika Kontemporer, UPI, Bandung, 2003.
[3] Alex Fisher, Berpikir Kritis Sebuah Pengantar,
[10] Sugiyono, Metode Penelitian Pendidikan
(Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D,
Erlangga, Jakarta, 2008.
Alfabeta, Bandung, 2011.
[4] Johnson, E.B, Contextual Teaching and Learning:
Menjadikan Kegiatan Belajar- Mengajar
Mengasyikkan dan Bermakna.(diterjemahkan oleh A.
Chaedar Alwasilah), Mizan Learning Center,
Bandung, 2007.

Copyright FMIPA UNP © 2015 58

ISBN 978-602-19877-3-5