Mathematical Reasoning Profile of Vocational Students in STEM-Based Contextual Problems Viewed from Field Independent and Field Dependent Cognitive Styles
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59944/jipsi.v5i3.1561Keywords:
mathematical reasoning; STEM contextual problems; cognitive style; field independent; field dependentAbstract
This study profiles the mathematical reasoning of vocational high school (SMK) students in the Electrical Power Installation Engineering (TITL) program when solving STEM-based contextual problems, examined through field independent (FI) and field dependent (FD) cognitive styles. An explanatory sequential mixed-methods design was applied to 40 eleventh-grade students. The Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT) classified cognitive style, while a researcher-developed STEM-based Mathematical Reasoning Test (TKPM), scored against five NCTM indicators, measured reasoning; six subjects (3 FI, 3 FD) were then explored through task-based clinical interviews analysed using Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis. Results show that 45% of students were FI and 55% FD. All six subjects fell into the Very Low category (mean 18.61 of 100), with 61.1% of indicator cells scoring zero. Reasoning declined steadily from conjecturing and manipulation (1.28 of 4) to drawing conclusions (0.61), justification (0.33), and validity checking (0.22). FI students displayed analytic independence (specific data enumeration, distractor filtering, and metacognitive self-correction) and excelled at open statistical reasoning, whereas FD students were strong in well-practised procedures (two of three perfect scores on matrix addition) but weak in meaning decomposition, scoring zero on justification and validity. Notably, the advantage reversed by task type: FI led on open reasoning, FD on structured procedure. Overall, the FI style more strongly supported STEM reasoning, though not uniformly. The findings offer an empirical basis for cognitively responsive mathematics instruction and underscore that reasoning errors (correct procedure but wrong conclusion) pose real workplace-safety risks in electrical work
References
Alqiawi, D. A., & Ezzeldin, S. M. (2021). Field dependence/independence and performance: Implications for mathematics education. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 50(1), 46–76.
Anggraini, R., Wijaya, A., & Hartono, Y. (2022). Analisis kesulitan belajar matematika siswa SMK berdasarkan kemampuan penalaran matematis. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 16(1), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.22342/jpm.16.1.89
Arifin, Z., & Setiawan, W. (2022). Pengaruh gaya kognitif terhadap kemampuan pemecahan masalah matematis siswa SMK pada materi trigonometri. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 16(2), 201–215. https://doi.org/10.22342/jpm.16.2.201
Baran, E., Canbazoglu Bilici, S., & Mesutoglu, C. (2021). Moving STEM beyond schools: Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of an informal STEM education program. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology, 9(3), 458–471. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.1226
Bjuland, R., & Fauskanger, J. (2022). Reasoning and proof in mathematics teacher education: Perspectives and directions. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 27(3–4), 5–28.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE Publications.
Brodie, K. (2021). Mathematical reasoning and argumentation in the classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 105(2), 191–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10034-1
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
English, L. D. (2023). Developing mathematical reasoning through integrated STEM problem solving. ZDM Mathematics Education, 55(1), 191–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01474-1
Evans, C., & Waring, M. (2022). Cognitive style in education: A review of field dependence–independence research. Educational Psychology, 42(5), 525–546. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2022.1943452
Herman, T., Darhim, & Dahlan, J. A. (2022). Kemampuan penalaran matematis siswa dalam menyelesaikan masalah kontekstual bidang vokasi. Journal on Mathematics Education, 13(2), 251–268. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v13i2.pp251-268
Hidayat, W., & Sariningsih, R. (2022). Kemampuan penalaran matematis siswa dalam menyelesaikan soal berbasis kontekstual. Jurnal Cendekia: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 6(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.31004/cendekia.v6i1.1089
Huda, S., Mujib, A., & Ramdhani, S. (2024). Analisis kemampuan penalaran matematis siswa berdasarkan gaya kognitif field independent dan field dependent. Jurnal Didaktika Pendidikan Dasar, 8(1), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.26811/didaktika.v8i1.1619
Kemendikbudristek. (2022). Capaian pembelajaran matematika SMK fase F. Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Vokasi.
Koichu, B., & Zazkis, R. (2022). Task-based interviews in mathematics education research: Design, analysis, and implications. ZDM Mathematics Education, 54(3), 599–612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-022-01369-6
Moore, T. J., Johnston, A. C., & Glancy, A. W. (2021). STEM integration: A synthesis of conceptual frameworks and definitions. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00285-2
Mutlu, Y., & Polat, S. (2022). The effect of cognitive style (field dependence/independence) on mathematical problem-solving performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(9), 2341–2365. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2021.1895337
Nurfaidah, S., & Wahyu, R. (2022). Hambatan dan peluang implementasi pembelajaran STEM di SMK Indonesia: Studi multi-kasus. Jurnal Pendidikan Vokasi, 12(3), 189–201. https://doi.org/10.21831/jpv.v12i3.52103
Pantziara, M., & Philippou, G. N. (2021). Students’ motivation in mathematics and their achievement: A multilevel analysis. ZDM Mathematics Education, 53(2), 399–412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01238-1
Permatasari, R., & Setiawan, W. (2022). Analisis kemampuan penalaran matematis siswa SMA ditinjau dari gaya kognitif field independent dan field dependent. Jurnal Pembelajaran Matematika Inovatif, 5(3), 689–700. https://doi.org/10.22460/jpmi.v5i3.9876
Pratiwi, D., Maharani, A., & Astuti, R. (2021). Hubungan kemampuan penalaran matematis dengan kompetensi keahlian siswa SMK Teknik Mesin. Jurnal Pendidikan Vokasi, 11(2), 156–168. https://doi.org/10.21831/jpv.v11i2.41128
Rahayu, D. W., & Subekti, F. E. (2023). Pengaruh pendekatan STEM terhadap kemampuan literasi dan penalaran matematis siswa SMK. Jurnal Cendekia: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 7(2), 1415–1428.
Rahmatiya, R., & Miatun, A. (2022). Analisis kemampuan pemecahan masalah matematis ditinjau dari gaya kognitif field independent dan field dependent siswa SMP. Teorema: Teori dan Riset Matematika, 7(1), 24–36.
Sahin, A., & Top, N. (2022). Teachers’ and students’ perceptions of an out-of-school STEM integration: A systematic review. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00358-w
Sari, D. P., & Mampouw, H. L. (2021). Profil kemampuan berpikir kritis siswa FI dan FD dalam menyelesaikan soal cerita matematika. JNPM (Jurnal Nasional Pendidikan Matematika), 5(1), 118–132. https://doi.org/10.33603/jnpm.v5i1.4137
Syarifah, T. J., Usdiyana, D., & Prabawanto, S. (2022). Kemampuan berpikir kritis matematis siswa SMK melalui pendekatan STEM berbasis proyek. Jurnal Cendekia: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 6(3), 2765–2778. https://doi.org/10.31004/cendekia.v6i3.1687
Thomas, G. (2021). How to do your case study (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Wijaya, T. T., Sukestiyarno, Y. L., & Hidayah, I. (2021). Penerapan pendekatan STEM untuk meningkatkan kemampuan penalaran matematis siswa SMK. Jurnal Cendekia: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 5(2), 1234–1247. https://doi.org/10.31004/cendekia.v5i2.456
Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R., & Cox, P. W. (1977). Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research, 47(1), 1–64. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543047001001
