Abstract

This study aimed to determine and describe: 1) the level of students' problem solving skills; 2) the students’ cognitive profile style 3) the differences in the ability to solve mathematical problems between students who have field independence cognitive style (FI) and field dependence (FD); and 4) the influence of cognitive style on students' problem solving abilities. This research was an ex-post facto research with correlational with a qualitative descriptive approach. When the research was conducted in the even semester of Academic year 2018/2019 at the Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar, the population were all students of Mathematics Education Study Program in semester IV with 180 students that spread over 8 classes with sample of 57 people taken through group sampling techniques.Data analysis techniques used in this study include quantitative descriptive analysis techniques and statistical statistics through simple regression analysis. The findings of the study: 1) the level of problem solving ability of students is in the medium category with an average value is73.17 with the highest value ois 94 and the lowest value is 40 with a range is 64; 2) The cognitive style profile of students was dominated by the cognitive style of field independence by 91.2% and the cognitive style of field dependence is8.8%; 3) There is a difference in the ability of solving problems between students who have a field independence cognitive style and a dependent field cognitive style. Where students with cognitive field independence style have higher abilities (in the high category) compared to students with cognitive field dependence style (in the medium category); and 4) Cognitive style has no significant effect on students' problem solving abilities, this illustrates that the cognitive style possessed by each student was not adequate to improve problem solving abilities for students. In solving mathematical problems, students need analytical skills, reasoning, adapting various approaches and strategies, reconstructing problems in other contexts involving mathematics, building new mathematical knowledge through problem solving, and monitoring and reflecting on the process of solving mathematical problems.

Keywords

References

[1] Arend, R. I. 2008. Learning To Teach. Edisi-7. Terjemahan Translation H. P. Soetjipto, Yogyakarta. Pustaka Pelajar
[2] BNSP. 2006. Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan. Education Unit Level Curriculum Dirjen : Jakarta.
[3] Brown, E., et al. 2006. Reappraising Cognitive Styles in Adaptive Web Applications. www2006.org/programme/files/pdf/1043.pdf. (Retrieved on 25 November 2017).
[4] Chrysostomou, M., et al. 2011. “Cognitive Styles and Their Relation to Number Sense and Algebraic Reasoning.” Proceedings of the Seventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, hal 387-396.http://www.cerme7.univ.rzeszow.pl/WG/2/CERME7_WG2_Chrysostomou.pdf.
[5] Ghozali, Imam. 2005. Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan SPSS (Multivariate Analysis Application with SPSS). Semarang: Badan Penerbit UNDIP. UNDIP Publisher Agency
[6] Hudoyo, Herman. 2003. Pengembangan Kurikulum dan Pembelajaran Matemátika.Curriculum Development and Mathematics Learning. Malang: Universitas Negeri Malang.
[7] Idris, N. 2006. Teaching and Learning of Mathematics: Making Sense and Developing Cognitive Abilities. Kuala Lumpur: Maziza SDN. BHD.
[8] Kirkley, Jamie. 2003. Principles for Teaching Problem Solving. Plato Learning, Inc.
[9] Kozhevnikov. M. 2007. “Cognitive Styles in the Context of Modern Psychology: Toward an Integrated Framework of Cognitive Style”. Psychological Bulletin. Volume 133 No. 3 pp. 464–481.https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0033-2909.133.3.464.
[10] Nasution, S. 2008. Berbagai Pendekatan Dalam Proses Belajar & Mengajar. Various Approaches In Learning & Teaching. Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara.
[11] National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Prinsiples and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston: NCTM.
[12] ____,2003. Standards for Secondary Mathematics Teacher. United States of America : The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Inc.
[13] Nugraha, M.G. 2016. Analisis Gaya Kognitif Field Dependent dan Field Independent Terhadap Penguasaan Konsep Fisika Siswa Kelas VII. Seminar Nasional Fisika 2016 Prodi Pendidikan Fisika dan Fisika, Fakultas MIPA, Universitas Negeri Jakarta.[Analysis of Cognitive Style Field Dependent and Independent Field Against Mastery of Physics Concepts of Class VII Students. 2016 National Physics Seminar Physics and Physics Education Study Program, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Jakarta State University].
[14] Marlissa, Indrid. 2015. Pengaruh Strategi React Ditinjau dari Gaya Kognitif terhadap Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah, Prestasi Belajar Dan Apresiasi Siswa Terhadap Matematika.The Influence of React Strategies Judging from the Cognitive Style on Problem Solving Ability, Learning Achievement and Student's Appreciation of Mathematics.Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika. Volume 2 – Nomor 2, November 2015, (186 - 196).
[15] Murtafiah, 2017. Deskrkipsi Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika Ditinjau dari Gaya Kognitif Mahasiswa Pendidikan Matematika Universitas Sulawesi Barat.Description of Mathematical Problem Solving Ability Judging from the Cognitive Style of Mathematics Education University of West Sulawesi University.Jurnal Pendidikan Mipa. Vol 7, No 1. 2017
[16] Risnawati, 2008. Strategi Pembelajaran Matematika, Mathematical Learning Strategies, Pekanbaru: Suska Press.
[17] Santia, I. 2015. RepresentasiSiswa SMA dalamMemecahkanMasalahMatematikaBerdasarkan Gaya Kognitif. JurnalIlmiahPendidikanMatematika, Representation of High School Students in Solving Mathematical Problems Based on Cognitive Style. Scientific Journal of Mathematics Education, 3(2): 365-381.
[18] Sardiman. 2006. InteraksidanMotivasiBelajar-Mengajar.Teaching and Learning Motivation and Motivation.Jakarta : PT. Raja GrafindoPersada.
[19] Sugiyono, 2008.MetodePenelitianKunatitatifKualitatifdan R&D. Qualitative Quantitative Research Methods and R&D. Bandung. Alfabeta.
[20] Slameto. 2010. Belajardanfaktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhinya. Jakarta: RinekaCipta.
[21] Sternberg, R.J. dan Elena L.G. 1997. “Are Cognitive Styles Still in Style”.American Psychologist Association, Volume 52 No. 7. Hal 700 – 712.
[22] Ulya, Ummatul. 2015. Hubungan Gaya Kognitif dengan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika Siswa. Relationship of Cognitive Style with Students' Mathematical Problem Solving Ability. Jurnal Konseling Gusjigang. Vol. 1 No. 2 Tahun 2015 ISSN 2460-1187.
[23] Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2003 tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional. Law Number 20 Year 2003 concerning the National Education System.
[24] Uno, H. B. 2006. Orientasi Baru dalam Psikologi Pembelajaran. New Orientation in Learning Psychology.Jakarta. PT. Bumi Aksara.
[25] _____, 2008. Teori Motivasi dan Pengukurannya, Motivation Theory and Measurement, Jakarta : PT. Bumi. Aksara.
[26] Wahyuddin, 2017. The Analysis of the Problem of Economic Mathematical Problems Reversed from the Ability of Logic Thinking in Students. International Electronic Journal Of Mathematics Education. Vol. 12, No 3, 585-598.
[27] Witkin, H.A., C. A. Moore., D. R. Goodenough., & P. W. Cox. 1977. Field-Dependent and Field-Independent Cognitive Styles and Their Educational Implications. Review of Educational Research. Winter 1977, Vol. 47, No. 1, 1-64.
[28] Woolfolk, Anita. 2004. Educational Psychology. Boston : Pearson Educational.
[29] Yousefi, M. 2011. “Cognitive Style and EFL Learners’ Listening Comprehension Ability”. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Volume 1 No. 1 PP. 73-83.
[30] Zakaria, Effandi. 2007. Trend Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Matematik. Teaching and Mathematical Learning Trends.Kuala Lumpur : PRIN-AD.