Students' Verbal Thinking Structure in Solving Geometry Problems: Interaction Analysis on Procedural, Disputational, and Exploratory
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v12i2.84535Keywords:
disputational, exploration, procedural, geometry, Verbal ThinkingAbstract
This study aims to describe students' verbal thinking structure in solving geometry problems through interaction analysis in procedural, disputational, and exploratory activities. This research used a qualitative approach with a case study method, involving five grade VIII students who were selected based on their verbal communication and academic abilities. Data were collected through video recordings of group discussions, which were then transcribed and analyzed based on students' verbal interaction patterns. The results showed that in procedural activities, students tend to follow the solution steps without in-depth analysis and only exchange information instructionally. In disputational activities, there are differences of opinion and defense of arguments, which encourage students to be more critical in evaluating solutions. Meanwhile, exploratory activities allow students to ask questions, test hypotheses, and reflect more deeply on solutions. This pattern of interaction development supports Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) theory, where social interaction plays a role in promoting students' cognitive development. This finding indicates that verbal interaction in geometry learning not only helps students understand concepts, but also improves critical thinking and problem solving skills.
References
Andrews, J., Fay, R., Frimberger, K., Tordzro, G., & ... (2020). Theorising arts-based collaborative research processes. … as Transformation: The …. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788928052
Barron, B. (2000). Achieving Coordination in Collaborative Problem- Solving Groups. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 403–436. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS0904
Barron, B. (2009). When Smart Groups Fail When Smart Groups Fail. 8406(2003), 307–359. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1203
Bassett, D. S., Yang, M., Wymbs, N. F., & Grafton, S. T. (2015). Learning-induced autonomy of sensorimotor systems. Nature Neuroscience, 18(5), 744–751.
Bhuvaneswari, R., Nagarajan, V., & ... (2021). Molecular interaction studies of styrene on single and double-walled square-octagon phosphorene nanotubes–First-principles investigation. Chemical Physics Letters. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0009261421008320
Ding, L., Er, E., & Orey, M. (2018). An exploratory study of student engagement in gamified online discussions. Computers & Education, 120, 213–226.
Francisco, J. M., & Maher, C. A. (2005). Conditions for promoting reasoning in problem solving: Insights from a longitudinal study. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 24(3–4), 361–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2005.09.001
Gillies, R. M. (2016). Dialogic interactions in the cooperative classroom. International Journal of Educational Research, 76, 178–189.
Gillies, R. M. (2019). Promoting academically productive student dialogue during collaborative learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 97(July), 200–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2017.07.014
González, G., & DeJarnette, A. F. (2015). Teachers’ and students’ negotiation moves when teachers scaffold group work. Cognition and Instruction, 33(1), 1–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2014.987058
Hennessy, S., Calcagni, E., Leung, A., & Mercer, N. (2023). An analysis of the forms of teacher-student dialogue that are most productive for learning. Language and Education, 37(2), 186–211.
Heron, M., Tenenbaum, H. R., & Hatch, R. J. (2023). Patterns of talk in Foundation Year small group interaction: making the case for educational dialogue. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 47(4), 450–464. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2022.2138286
Hwang, G.-J., Lai, C.-L., Liang, J.-C., Chu, H.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2018). A long-term experiment to investigate the relationships between high school students’ perceptions of mobile learning and peer interaction and higher-order thinking tendencies. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(1), 75–93.
Kumpulainen, K. (2009). Investigating Classroom Interaction. In Methodologies in …. http://ses.telecom-paristech.fr/baker/Makitaloetal2009.pdf
Kumpulainen, K., & Mutanen, M. (1999). The situated dynamics of peer group interaction: An introduction to an analytic framework. Learning and Instruction, 9(5), 449–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(98)00038-3
Littleton, K., & Mercer, N. (2013). Interthinking: Putting talk to work. Routledge.
Lloyd, G. M., & Murphy, P. K. (2023). Mathematical argumentation in small-group discussions of complex mathematical tasks in elementary teacher education settings. In Mathematical challenges for all (pp. 169–195). Springer.
Lowrie, I. (2017). Algorithmic rationality: Epistemology and efficiency in the data sciences. Big Data & Society, 4(1), 2053951717700925.
Mata-Pereira, J., & da Ponte, J.-P. (2017). Enhancing students’ mathematical reasoning in the classroom: teacher actions facilitating generalization and justification. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 96(2), 169–186.
Mueller, M., Yankelewitz, D., & Maher, C. (2016). A framework for analyzing the collaborative construction of arguments and its interplay with agency Author ( s ): Mary Mueller , Dina Yankelewitz and Carolyn Maher Source : Educational Studies in Mathematics , Vol . 80 , No . 3 ( July 2012 ), pp . 369-387. 80(3), 369–387.
Nagabandi, A., Clavera, I., Liu, S., Fearing, R. S., Abbeel, P., Levine, S., & Finn, C. (2018). Learning to adapt in dynamic, real-world environments through meta-reinforcement learning. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:1803.11347.
Pomés, A., Mueller, G. A., & Chruszcz, M. (2020). Structural aspects of the allergen-antibody interaction. Frontiers in Immunology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.02067
Reinking, D., & Yaden Jr, D. B. (2021). Do we need more productive theorizing? A commentary. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(3), 383–399.
Rojas-drummond, S. M., Albarrán, C. D., & Littleton, K. S. (2008). Collaboration , creativity and the co-construction of oral and written texts. 3, 177–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2008.09.008
Saleh, M., Lazonder, A. W., & Jong, T. de. (2007). Structuring collaboration in mixed-ability groups to promote verbal interaction, learning, and motivation of average-ability students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), 314–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.05.001
Sánchez, V., García, M., & Escudero, I. (2013). An analytical framework for analyzing student teachers’ verbal interaction in learning situations. Instructional Science, 41(2), 247–269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9226-5
Sangin, M., Dillenbourg, P., Rebetez, C., Bétrancourt, M., & Molinari, G. (2008). The effects of animations on verbal interaction in computer supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(5), 394–406. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2008.00275.x
Seidl, E. (2022). The Multilingual Classroom in Translator Education: Students and Teachers as Co-Participants. Handbook of Research on Multilingual and …. https://www.igi-global.com/chapter/the-multilingual-classroom-in-translator-education/297952
Sfard, A., & Kieran, C. (2001). Cognition as communication: Rethinking learning-by-talking through multi-faceted analysis of students’ mathematical interactions. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 8(1), 42–76.
Syarifudin, Purwanto, Irawan, E. B., Sulandra, I. M., & Fikriyah, U. (2019). Student verbal interaction in geometry problem-solving through cognitive activities. International Journal of Instruction, 12(3), 167–182. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12311a
Ulger, K. (2015). The Structure of Creative Thinking: Visual and Verbal Areas. Creativity Research Journal, 27(1), 102–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2015.992689
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher mental process. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Watson, J. M., & Chick, H. L. (2001). Factors influencing the outcomes of collaborative mathematical problem solving: An introduction. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 3(2–3), 125–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2001.9679971
Webb, N. M. (2014). Interaction and Learning in Peer-Directed Groups. 24(1), 32–39.
Weber, K., Maher, C., Powell, A., & Lee, H. S. (2008). Learning opportunities from group discussions: Warrants become the objects of debate. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 68(3), 247–261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9114-8
White, T., Wallace, M., & Lai, K. (2012). Graphing in Groups : Learning About Lines in a Collaborative Classroom Network Environment. 149–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2012.656363
Wu, J., Guo, R., Wang, Z., & Zeng, R. (2021). Integrating spherical video-based virtual reality into elementary school students’ scientific inquiry instruction: effects on their problem-solving performance. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(3), 496–509. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1587469
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika by http://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/jrpm/index is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
