Construction of Students' Mathematical Knowledge in the Zone of Proximal Development and Zone of Potential Construction
Imam Kusmaryono
,
Jupriyanto Jupriyanto
,
Widya Kusumaningsih
This article highlights the main ideas that underlie the differences in potential pragmatic knowledge constructs students experience when solving prob.
- Pub. date: January 15, 2021
- Pages: 341-351
- 971 Downloads
- 754 Views
- 12 Citations
This article highlights the main ideas that underlie the differences in potential pragmatic knowledge constructs students experience when solving problems, between the zone of proximal development (ZPD) and the zone of potential construction (ZPC). This qualitative research is based on a phenomenological approach to finding the meaning of things that are fundamental and essential from the ZPD and ZPC phenomena. Researchers observed mathematics learning by a teacher on 24 fourth-grade students who were divided into groups A (high IQ) and B (low IQ). Data collection through tests, observation, and interviews. While the validity of the data is done through triangulation of methods and triangulation of sources. The results showed that students of the Upper (A) group had high IQ but small ZPD and ZPC. In contrast, students in the Lower (B) group have low IQ but large ZPD and ZPC. This result means that intelligence (IQ) is measured not only logically-mathematically but also in the verbal-linguistic and spatial-visual fields. The conclusion is that there are differences in the construction of students' knowledge in the learning zone. This difference occurs because the knowledge constructs that the students have previously had an effect on the accommodation process of the schemes that students have built while in the proximal development zone (ZPD) where scaffolding works. Meanwhile, the potential construction zone (ZPC) is not sufficient to describe the real development of students. However, it only reflects what students have accomplished.
Keywords: Construction of knowledge, zone of proximal development, zone of potential construction, scaffolding.
References
Abtahi, Y., Graven, M., & Lerman, S. (2017). Conceptualising the more knowledgeable other within a multi-directional ZPD. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 96(3), 275–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9768-1
Bikmaz, F. H., Çelebi, Ö., Ata, A., Özer, E., Soyak, Ö., & Reçber, H. (2016). Scaffolding strategies applied by student teachers to teach mathematics. Educational Research Association The International Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 1(1), 25–36.
Breive, S. (2020). Student–teacher dialectic in the co-creation of a zone of proximal development: An example from kindergarten mathematics. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 28(3), 413–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2020.1755498
Brower, R. L., Woods, C. S., Jones, T. B., Park, T. J., Hu, S., Tandberg, D. A., Nix, A. N., Rahming, S. G., & Martindale, S. K. (2018). Scaffolding mathematics remediation for academically at-risk students following developmental education reform in Florida. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 42(2), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2017.1279089
Damrongpanit, S. (2019). From modern teaching to mathematics achievement: The mediating role of mathematics attitude, achievement motivation, and self-efficacy. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(3), 713–727. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.3.713
Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791
Daymon, C., & Holloway, I. (2014). Qualitative research methods in public relations and marketing communications. Routledge.
Esendemir, O., & Bindak, R. (2019). Adaptation of the test developed to measure mathematical knowledge of teaching geometry in Turkey. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 5(4), 547–565. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.5.4.547
Eun, B. (2019). The zone of proximal development as an overarching concept: A framework for synthesizing Vygotsky’s theories. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 51(1), 18–30. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2017.1421941
Fani, T., & Ghaemi, F. (2011). Implications of Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development (ZPD) in teacher education: ZPTD and self-scaffolding. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29(1), 1549–1554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.396
Ghorbani, M. R. (2016). Effect of scaffolding in a cooperative learning condition on undergraduate EFL learners ’ vocabulary retention. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching in the Islamic World, 4(6), 11–16.
Gravemeijer, K., & Terwel, J. (2000). Hans Freudenthal: A mathematician on didactics and curriculum theory. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(6), 777–796. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270050167170
Jalilifar, A., Shooshtari, Z. G., & Haghighi, S. B. (2017). A multimodal approach toward teaching for transfer: a case of team-teaching in ESAP writing courses. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 35(4), 157–190.
Jamalinesari, A., & Rahimi, F. (2015). The effects of teacher-written direct vs. indirect feedback on students’ writing. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 19(2), 116–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.018
Joubish, M. F., & Khurram, M. A. (2011). Cognitive development in Jean Piaget’s work and its implications for teachers. World Applied Sciences Journal, 12(8), 1260–1265.
Junarti, Sukestiyarno, Y. L., Mulyono, & Dwidayati, N. K. (2019). The profile of structure sense in abstract algebra instruction in an Indonesian mathematics education. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(4), 1081–1091. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.4.1081
Kadwa, M. S., & Alshenqeeti, H. (2020). The impact of students’ proficiency in english on science courses in a foundation year program. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 3(11), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt
Khaliliaqdam, S. (2014). ZPD, scaffolding and basic speech development in EFL context. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 891–897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.497
Khan, S. N. (2014). Qualitative research method - Phenomenology. Asian Social Science, 10(21), 298–310. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v10n21p298
Kim, N. J., & Belland, B. R. (2018). Effectiveness of computer-based scaffolding in the context of problem-based learning for stem education: bayesian meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2), 397–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9419-1
Liang, B. (2019). A radical constructivist model of teachers’ mathematical learning through student-teacher interaction. In Otten, S., Candela, A. G., de Araujo, Z., Haines, C., & Munter, C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, (Vol.11, pp.1814–1819). University of Missouri.
Moll, L. C. (1990). Vygotsky and education: instructional implications and applications of socio historical psychology. Cambridge University Press.
Mula, M., & Hodnik, T. (2020). The PGBE model for building students’ mathematical knowledge about percentages. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(1), 257–276. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.1.257
Mutekwe, E. (2018). Using a Vygotskian sociocultural approach to pedagogy: Insights from some teachers in South Africa. Journal of Education, 71(1),58-72. https://doi.org/10.17159/2520-9868/i71a04
Norton, A., & D’Ambrosio, B. S. (2008). ZPC and ZPD: Zones of teaching and learning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(3), 220–246.
Österman, T., & Bråting, K. (2019). Dewey and mathematical practice: Revisiting the distinction between procedural and conceptual knowledge. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 51(4), 457–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2019.1594388
Petakos, K. (2018). Mathematical anxiety and the zone of proximal development. Experiences of Teaching with Mathematics, Sciences and Technology, 4(2), 601–607.
Piaget, J. (1964). Part I: Cognitive development in children: Piaget development and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2(3), 176–186. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660020306
Pol, J. Van De, & Beishuizen, J. (2015). Scaffolding in teacher – student interaction : A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6
Rieber, R. W., & Carton, A. S. (1987). The genetic roots of thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber & A.S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky. Springer.
Shabani, K. (2016). Applications of Vygotsky’s sociocultural approach for teachers’ professional development. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1252177
Silalahi, R. M. (2019). Understanding Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development for learning. Polyglot: Scientific Journal, 15(2),169-186. https://doi.org/10.19166/pji.v15i2.1544
Steffe, L. P., & D’Ambrosio, B. S. (1995). Toward a working model of constructivist teaching: A reaction to Simon. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(2), 146–159. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/749206
Steffe, L. P. (1991). The constructivist teaching experiment: illustrations and implications. In von Glasersfeld, E. (Eds.), radical constructivism in mathematics education. Kluwer, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Steinbring, H. (2000). The genesis of new mathematical knowledge as a social construction. In T. Nakahara & M. Koyama (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol.4, pp. 177–184). PME.
Suranata, K., Rangka, I. B., Ifdil, I., Ardi, Z., Susiani, K., Prasetyaningtyas, W. E., Daharnis, D., Alizamar, A., Erlinda, L., & Rahim, R. (2018). Diagnosis of students zone proximal development on math design instruction: a rasch analysis. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1114(1), 1742-1749. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1114/1/012034
Tinungki, G. M. (2019). Zone proximal development gives a new meaning to the students’ intelligence in statistical method lesson. Journal of Honai Math, 2(2), 129–142. https://doi.org/10.30862/jhm.v2i2.69
van de Pol, J., & Volman, M. (2019). Scaffolding student understanding in small-group work: students’ uptake of teacher support in subsequent small-group interaction. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28(2), 206–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2018.1522258
von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. Studies in mathematics education series: 6. Bristol, PA: Falmer Press, Taylor & Francis Inc.
Walshaw, M. (2017). Understanding mathematical development through Vygotsky. Research in Mathematics Education, 19(3), 295–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2017.1379728
Wibawa, K. A., Nusantara, T., Subanji, & Nengah Parta, I. (2018). Defragmentation of student’s thinking structures in solving mathematical problems based on CRA framework. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1028(1),1-8. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1028/1/012150