Cypriot Journal of Educational

Sciences
Volume 17, Issue 12, (2022) 4628-4640
www.cjes.eu
Students’ difficulties in solving geometry
problems

Nur Rokhman Ramdjid*, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Mathematics Education Study Program, Postgraduate
Program, Indonesia. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0534-3470
Sukestiyarno Sukestiyarno, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Mathematics Education Study Program,
Postgraduate Program, Indonesia. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2377-5872
Rochmad Rochmad, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Mathematics Education Study Program, Postgraduate
Program, Indonesia. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1146-4508
Mulyono Mulyono, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Mathematics Education Study Program, Postgraduate
Program, Indonesia. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4511-846X

Suggested Citation:
Ramdjid, R. N., Sukestiyarno, S., Rochmad, R. & Mulyono, M. (2022). Students’ difficulties in solving geometry
problems. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(12), 4628-4640.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i12.7039

Received from August 20, 2022; revised from September 28, 2022; accepted from December 20, 2022
©2022 by the authors. Licensee Birlesik Dunya Yenilik Arastirma ve Yayincilik Merkezi, North Nicosia, Cyprus.
This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ).
Abstract

This study is based on research findings that examines students' difficulties utilizing Polya's problem to solve geometry problems -
solving stages. Thirty-one students were assigned to work on questions about the material in order to calculate the distance in space.
Researchers examined each student’s work to determine which stage of Polya they struggled with. In-depth interviews were also
conducted to clarify answers and investigate students' difficulties in solving math problems. The results showed that students who were
able to answer completely and correctly, based on Polya’s stages in understanding the problem, compiling or thinking about a solution
plan, solving the problem according to the plan and re- examining the procedure and the results of solving the answer, had a very low
success rate. Scaffolding is given to students who have difficulty and recognition of the accuracy of correct answers for those who are
successful.

Keywords: Geometry, Polya’s problem-solving stages, students difficulties.

*
ADDRESS OF CORRESPONDENCE: Nur Rokhman Ramdjid, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Mathematics
Education Study Program, Postgraduate Program, Indonesia
Email address: [email protected]
Ramdjid, R. N., Sukestiyarno, S., Rochmad, R. & Mulyono, M. (2022). Students’ difficulties in solving geometry problems. Cypriot Journal of
Educational Science. 17(12), 4628-4640. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i12.7039

1. Introduction
1.1. Conceptual and theoretical framework
Problem-solving is a critical effort formed to eliminate the complex process of potential
challenges in order to achieve a specific goal. Individuals engage in problem-solving as a cognitive
behavioural process to find practical answers to the challenges that are experienced in everyday
life. Tall (2002) states that problem-solving is a more creative activity that includes the formulation
of possible conjectures, a series of testing activities, modification and refinement until a formal
proof of a well- defined theorem can be produced. According to Zhu (2007), The method for
resolving mathematical issues requires a complex level of mental effort. The ability to build logical
reasoning skills that can be utilized in a variety of circumstances in everyday life, both now and in
the future, can be gained through solving mathematical questions (Mullis et al., 2012). The process
of solving mathematical problems is one that is difficult, abstract, and needs the thinking and
reasoning of a human being. Mathematical education places a significant emphasis on the
development of problem-solving abilities (Chimmalee & Anupan, 2022).
When a task encounters some obstacles, mathematical problem-solving occurs. The
application of problem-solving strategies in mathematics calls for inventive thought as well as a
methodical approach (Blanco et al., 2013). This condition refers to the ability to create contextual
problem- solving programmes using patterns in order to solve problems. Students require specific
methods in order to find solutions to the challenges they are facing. (algorithms). When students
are unable to solve a problem simply by following the work method in the form of an algorithm,
other work methods must be used to facilitate the solution (heuristic). Students will channel their
thoughts through heuristics so that they do not work by simply experimenting without direction.
Concept maps which are created by drawing pictures, patterns and schemes are a type of heuristic
for solving mathematical problems. Students’ ability to find algorithms and heuristics in solving
mathematical problems are components of metacognitive abilities.
Problem-solving ability, according to Trilling and Fadel (2009), Students need to have a
process skill throughout the mathematics learning process. Problem-solving ability is a
dynamic process that develops in response to the type, characteristics, and framework of the issue
at hand. Students are able to think about unique situations, decide what to do and how to do it,
and make use of chances that exist to obtain solutions when they have problem-solving skills.
These skills lay somewhere between learning skills and renewal skills. Kazemi et al. (2010) It
should be stated that the ability to solve issues is intricately tied to both cognition and
metacognition. According to Booker et al. (2014), problem- solving components include
manipulating the concept, understanding the concept, noting similarities, differences and
analogies, identifying critical issues and selecting appropriate procedures, analysing incorrect
details, interpreting the relationship between facts and makinggeneralisations.
Students learning mathematics need problem-solving, critical thinking and analytical
thinking skills. The ability to solve problems is a critical requirement that mustbe met in order for
a teacher to survive. Individuals’ problem-solving abilities can vary depending on the type of
problems they face (Anilan & Berber, 2019). The mathematical problem-solving abilities of
students are characterized by their capacity to solve story problems and non-routine tasks; apply
the use of mathematics in regular life or other situations; prove, develop, or test conjectures; and
apply the use of mathematics in regular life or other situations.
Lessons in mathematics are generally seen as being challenging and difficult to understand
for students. (Kadirbayeva et al., 2022). Students are allowed to build their capacity to alter and
modify their approach to a variety of new problem scenarios by solving mathematical problems
(Chimmalee & Anupan, 2022). Students are able to learn and apply a variety of mathematical
concepts and procedures, as well as cultivate and value adequate mathematical competences,

4629
Ramdjid, R. N., Sukestiyarno, S., Rochmad, R. & Mulyono, M. (2022). Students’ difficulties in solving geometry problems. Cypriot Journal of
Educational Science. 17(12), 4628-4640. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i12.7039

through the development and acquisition of problem-solving capabilities in their educational

experiences (Antunovic & Baranovic, 2022).
According to Charles and O'Daffer (1997), The objectives of problem-solving learning in
mathematics are to develop students' thinking skillfulness, develop students' capability to select
and use problem-solving strategies, develop problem-solving beliefs and attitudes, develop
students' capacities to use interrelated knowledge, develop students' capability to observe and
evaluate their thinking and the results of their career while solving problems, and develop
students' capabilities to use interrelated knowledge.
Siregar (2017) contends that when using problem-based learning, students must motivate
students in group study so that problem-solving activities have an impact on improving
mathematical problem-solving skills. Scaffolding is provided to students in problem-based learning
so that they can solve problems without the assistance of others. Critical thinking, in the form of
bright ideas, is required during the problem-solving process in order to find effective and accurate
solutions. Critical thinking is a well-known capacity that aids in the development of both a person
and a system by fostering the production of insights about important problems (Amhar et al.,
2022). Students' scholastic achievement, as well as their capacity to comprehend scientific
principles and the very basis of scientific inquiry, is directly correlated to their level of logical
reasoning and reasoning abilities (Aiym et al., 2022).
Internal student factors such as initial knowledge ability, mathematics appreciation and
mathematical logical intelligence are particularly important in influencing mathematical problem-
solving abilities (Eka et al., 2016). According to Fauzi et al. (2019), prior knowledge of what
students have missed or forgotten is important in developing students’ creative mathematical
abilities to learn new information. Students with a low ability to solve problems are characterized
by having a low ability to analyze problems, a low ability to build problem-solving plans, and a low
ability to carry out computations, particularly those connected to sensitive material that supports
the problem-solving process.
According to Polya (1973) (as cited in Misa'adah & Mariani, 2021; Nalurita, 2019;Siregar,
2017; Sukoriyanto et al., 2016), The following are the steps involved in problem-solving: first and
foremost, having a comprehension of the issue; Activities at this level involve determining what
(data) is known, determining what (questions) is unknown, determining if the knowledge is
adequate, and determining what requirements (conditions) must be satisfied in order to solve the
original problem in a more operational form. Second, compiling or considering a solution plan;
activities that can be undertaken at this stage include attempting to locate or recall previously
solved problems that have similarities with the problem to be solved, searching for patterns or
rules and compiling procedures for problem-solving (making conjectures). Third, resolving the
problem in accordance with the plan; activities that can be undertaken at this stage include
carrying out the procedures devised in the previous stage in order to obtain a solution. Fourth,
eexamine the procedure and the consequences of the settlement; Activities that can be performed
at this stage include analyzing and evaluating whether the processes employed and the findings
gained are accurate, perhaps there are other methods that are more efficient, whether the
procedures created can be utilized to solve problems, and whether or not the method may be used
for a wider population.
Students who take geometry classes are better able to develop various skills, including the
ability to conjecture, reason deductively, argues logically, and prove their conclusions (Zhang,
2017). One of the factors that contributes to pupils having difficulty understanding mathematics is
the fact that geometry is a topic that requires students to comprehend abstract concepts (Andika
et al., 2020).
1.2.Purpose of the study
This study aimed to investigate the students' attitudes toward the difficulties in solving

4630
Ramdjid, R. N., Sukestiyarno, S., Rochmad, R. & Mulyono, M. (2022). Students’ difficulties in solving geometry problems. Cypriot Journal of
Educational Science. 17(12), 4628-4640. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i12.7039

geometric problems involving determining the distance in space using Polya's problem-solving
stages.
2. Method
2.1. Research design
The methodology for the research used descriptive-analytical, quantitative techniques, and
correlational research design were utilized in this study's research design. Techniques used to
collect data are documentation, interviews and the problem- solving ability assessment
instrument. The problem-solving ability assessment instrument sheet is designed in an answer
column format that is sorted by the Polya stage.
2.2. Participants
This study was conducted on 31 students from year XII IPA 3 at SMA Negeri 1 Salem,
Indonesia, with 11 (35.48%) males and 20 (64.52%) females assigned to work on questions about
the material in order to calculate the distance in space. In-depth interviews were also conducted
on six students to clarify answers and investigate students' difficulties in solving math problems.
2.3. Data collection process
Students were given a geometric problem to solve in order to determine the distance
in space using the Polya-based problem-solving stages. The researcher corrected each student’s
answer to determine where they struggled at the Polya stage. In-depth interviews were conducted
after analysing the results of students' answers in order to clarify answers and explore the
difficulties students encountered when solving mathematical problems.
2.4. Validity and reliability of the instrument
The problem-solving capability evaluation tool sheet was explicitly created in an answer
column sorted by the Polya stage. This instrument has been validated by educational experts and
practitioners with an average score (Va) of 4.65, which is in the range 4 ≤ Va < 5, with a very valid
category, and the percentage of validator perceptions is 93.06, which is in the range of 84% ≤ x ≤
100%, with very good criteria.
The following illustrates the assessment rubric that will be used to establish the
requirements for acquiring mathematical problem-solving abilities, as shown in Table 1.
Table 1
Criteria for Achievement Mathematical Problem-Solving Abilities
Average score Achievements Criteria
4.2 ≤ Va ˂ 5 84% ≤ x ≤ 100% Very good/very high
3.4 ≤ Va ˂ 4.2 68% ≤ x < 83% Good/high
2.6 ≤ Va ˂ 3.4 52% ≤ x < 67% Fairly good/medium
1.8 ≤ Va ˂ 2.6 36% ≤ x < 51% Not good/low
1 ≤ Va ˂ 1.8 20% ≤ x < 35% Poor/very low
Va is average score, x is achievement mathematical problem-solving
abilities.
Table 2 shows the description of results on students' answers in geometry problem-solving.
Table 2
Description of Results on Students' Answers in Geometry Problem-Solving

Students’ answers Descriptions of students in geometry problem-

solving

4631
Ramdjid, R. N., Sukestiyarno, S., Rochmad, R. & Mulyono, M. (2022). Students’ difficulties in solving geometry problems. Cypriot Journal of
Educational Science. 17(12), 4628-4640. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i12.7039

Complete Understand the facts presented in the problem accurately and the problem itself and
can simplify it by employing the language most familiar to them.
Able to apply ideas correctly completely and in detail and can combine ideas so as to
produce novelty.
Complete verification, able to find and implement ideas appropriately
Incomplete Understand the information contained in the problem correctly and be able to state
theessence of the problem in their own language.
Understand the problem well, be able to apply the solution ideas correctly and in
detailand can combine ideas but are not complete.
Complete verification but have not implemented ideas because they are not complete.
Incorrect Understand the information contained in the problem but still write it down in
theproblem and do not understand the problem presented.
Doing work on the questions but still wrong because they don't understand the
problems presented in the questions.
Not verifying.
No response Not working on the questions at all or just copying the questions, there is no
completion process and no verification process.
2.5. Data analysis
In the data analysis section, statistical data were analyzed in the Statistics programme by using
percentage (%) and linear regression analysis.
3. Findings and discussion
Table 3 displays the percentage of results obtained from the analysis of the responses
provided by the 31 pupils by Polya's stages of problem-solving.

4632
Ramdjid, R. N., Sukestiyarno, S., Rochmad, R. & Mulyono, M. (2022). Students’ difficulties in solving geometry problems. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(12), 4628-4640. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i12.7039

Table 3
Percentage of Answer Analysis Results Based on Polya’s Stages

Answer and percentage

Polya's stages Activities performed Complete Incomplete Incorrect No response
JM PA PR JM PA PR JM PA PR JM PA PR
Understanding the problem Identifying the known (data) 4 12.9 6.5 12 38.7 63.2 1 3.23 3.23 14 45.2 27.1
Recognizing what is unknown (asked) 2 6.45 21 67.7 2 6.45 6 19.4
Determining whether the information is adequate 2 6.45 13 42.0 0 0 16 51.6
What prerequisites must be met? 1 3.23 25 80.7 1 3.23 4 12.9
Restating the initial issue in an operational (solvable) 1 3.23 27 87.1 1 3.23 2 6.45
manner
Devising a solution plan Attempting to locate or recall a previously solved 1 3.23 3.2 18 58.1 62.4 9 29.0 20,4 3 9.68 14.0
problem that has similarities to the problem at hand.
Looking for patterns or rules 1 3.23 19 61.3 7 22.6 4 12.9
Developing completion procedures (making 1 3.23 21 67.8 3 9.68 6 19.4
conjectures)
Carrying out the plan Carrying out the procedures that have been made in 2 6.45 6.5 19 61.3 61.3 3 9.68 9,68 7 22.6 22.58
the previous stage to get a solution
Looking back Analyzing and evaluating the correctness of the 1 3.23 1.6 23 74.2 73.4 1 3.23 8,06 6 19.4 16.94
techniques used and the results obtained
Is there another procedure that is more effective 1 3.23 22 71.0 2 6.45 6 19.4
Can the procedures created be used to solve similar 0 0 24 77.4 3 9.68 4 12.9
problems?
Can the procedure be generalised? 0 0 22 71.0 4 12.9 5 16.1
0
KPM (%) 4.44 65.07 10.35 20.15

JM = Number of students, PA = Percentage of each activity carried out, PR = Average percentage of each stage Polya, KPM = Problem-solving skills.
.

4633
Ramdjid, R. N., Sukestiyarno, S., Rochmad, R. & Mulyono, M. (2022). Students’ difficulties in solving geometry problems. Cypriot Journal of
Educational Science. 17(12), 4628-4640. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i12.7039

Based on Table 3, the average percentage of problem-solving ability test answers

shows that 4.44% of the responses given by the pupils were exhaustive and correctly. This
demonstrates that students have a shallow capability to solve geometric problems based on
the Polya stages. The average percentage of students who can answer completely and
correctly based on Polya's stages in understanding the problem is 6.45%; students compile or
think of a solution plan is 3.23%; students solve problems according to plan is 6.45%; and
students re-examine the procedures and results of completion of answers is 1.61%. In Table
2, an average percentage of 65.07 answered incompletely, 10.35% answered incorrectly and
20.15% did not respond.

Based on Polya's stages of problem-solving, examples of

displaying student work in a complete and correct manner
are provided. The following questions are being worked on
by students: A building in the form of a block has a floor
area of 4 m × 8 m and a height of 10
m. Suppose the shape of the block is called ABCD.EFGH.
Find the length of the distance from point G to the plane of
the diagonal CDEF.

twitter.com

The following are the Polya-based problem-solving stages performed by students.

Polya's stages Activities performed Student answers Transliteration

Understanding Identifying what (data) is A block ABCD.EFGH with length
theProblem known AB = 4 cm, BC = 8 cm and BF =
10 cm
Identifying what is not The distance between point
known (asked) Gand the diagonal plane CDEF
Identifying whether the Not yet, because we have to
information is sufficient define a line CF on the CDEF
diagonal plane. Next draw a
line perpendicular from point G
to the diagonal plane CDEF
through line CF.

What conditions must In a right triangle CGF mustfind

bemet the length of the line GI

Restating the initial issue To determine the distance

in an operational between point G and the CDEF
(solvable) manner diagonal plane, you must make
a line CF on the CDEF diagonal
plane, then make a
perpendicular line from point G

The students understood the problem in stage 1 by identifying known and asked data,
informationon questions, requirements that must be satisfied, as well as rephrasing the issue
in an operational manner.

4634
Ramdjid, R. N., Sukestiyarno, S., Rochmad, R. & Mulyono, M. (2022). Students’ difficulties in solving geometry problems. Cypriot Journal of
Educational Science. 17(12), 4628-4640. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i12.7039

.
Polya's stages Activities performed Student answers Transliteration
Devising a Attempting to locate or Determine the length of the line
solution plan recall a previously perpendicular to the plane of
solved problem that has the diagonal CDEF through the
similarities to the line CF that intersects at point I
problem at hand.
Looking for patterns or
rules

Developing completion Draw blocks ABCD.EFGH

procedures (making according to what you know
conjectures) Determine a line CF on the
diagonal plane CDEF
Draw a line from point G that is
perpendicular to the diagonal
plane CDEF through the line
CF that intersects at point I
Make a triangle containing the
line GI, i.e. triangle CGF
Determine the length of the line
GI using the ratio of the area of
the triangle

In stage 2, the students have compiled or thought of a solution plan by recalling previous
problemsthat have similarities with the problems to be solved.
Polya's stages Activities performed Student answers Transliteration
Carrying out the Carrying out the Find the length of GI (using the
plan procedures that have ratio of the area of the triangle)
been made in the
previous stage to get a So the length of the line GI
(concluded that the distance of
solution
point G to the diagonal plane
CDEF =

In stage 3, the students solved the problem using the procedural plan devised in stage 2 to
arrive ata solution.

4635
Ramdjid, R. N., Sukestiyarno, S., Rochmad, R. & Mulyono, M. (2022). Students’ difficulties in solving geometry problems. Cypriot Journal of
Educational Science. 17(12), 4628-4640. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i12.7039

Polya's stages Activities performed Student answers Transliteration

Looking back Analyzing and evaluating Find the length of FG using
the correctness of the the value of GI
employed procedures
and the obtained results

FG = 8 cm
Then the procedure used
andthe result is correct
Is there another Yes, by using the projection
procedure that is more theorem formula
effective
Can the processes Ya Yes
developed be utilized to
find comparable
solutions to issues?
Can the procedure be Ya Yes
generalised?

In stage 4, the students re-examined the procedure and its completion results by performing an
investigation and evaluation to determine whether the methods that were applied and the
results that were achieved were accurate.

The next step is for students to make assumptions in the form of new ideas about
whether there are other more effective procedures that can be applied to the resolution of
similar challenges and generalise. In this activity, students recognise the answers obtained
through other procedures that provide accuracy that the answers obtained are correct and
make generalisations through reinforcement. In this geometry problem, students continue to
solve the problem by using the projection theorem formula with the triangle area approach.

Transliteration
1) Area of a triangle using the projection formula

4636
Ramdjid, R. N., Sukestiyarno, S., Rochmad, R. & Mulyono, M. (2022). Students’ difficulties in solving geometry problems. Cypriot Journal of
Educational Science. 17(12), 4628-4640. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i12.7039

2) Find length P(CI)

3) Find the of GI.
4) Find the length of the GI with other procedures obtained the same and correct results.

This study found, based on an analysis of student work outcomes, that the
characteristics of students who had difficulties answering issues were characterized by the
outcomes of the work done by pupils who answered in incomplete detail, incorrectly and did
not answer, so that students tended to be unable to understand the problem, were unable
to formulate or think of solution plans, and were not successful in resolving the issue by the
plan. In addition, students are unable to perform re-examine of the analysis of the process as
well as the final findings.. This finding supports the findings of Vinner’s (1997) research,
which discovered facts about teachers and students in problem-solving situations in which
students frequently do not exercise control when solving a problem. Students who cannot
solve mathematical problems in a structured and accurate manner are given scaffolding to
work through the challenges, and students who have been directed to do recognition in the
form of strengthening the answers obtained through other procedures that provide accuracy
that the answers obtained are correct and make generalisations.
In-depth interviews were conducted after analysing students’ answers in order to
clarify answers and explore students’ talents in finding solutions to mathematical issues using
Polya's stages as a guide. The interviews were conducted with six students, two of whom
represented the low group (RD and HL), two of whom represented the medium group (TJ and
AG) and two of whom represented the high group (RF and LF). Table 4 it contains a summary
of what was said in the interviews about the questions on the test of problem-solving.
Table 4
Summary of the
Interview
Results

Participants Interview summary

RD Students cannot distinguish between what they know (data) and what they do not know
(questions), so they do not understand the questions well and tend to only rewrite the parts
written on the subject matter (stem).
Students have been unable to determine whether the information on the subject is adequate.
Students have been unable to identify what conditions must be met in order to solve
theproblem.
HL Students attempt to comprehend the problem and restate it in a more operational
(solvable)form.
Students attempt to devise or consider a problem-solving strategy.
TJ Students have a thorough understanding of the problem and are capable of devising
problem-solving procedures (making conjectures).
Students are able to solve problems according to plan
AG Students have a good understanding of the problem, can devise problem-solving procedures
and can solve problems according to the plan.
Students re-examined the procedure and the completion results.
RF Students have a good understanding of the problem, can devise problem-solving procedures
and can solve problems according to the plan.
Students re-examined the procedure and the completion results.
LF Students have a good understanding of the problem, can devise problem-solving procedures,
and can solve problems according to the plan.
Students re-examined the procedure and the completion results.

According to the data presented in Table 4, it is clear that students’ difficulties Utilizing
Polya's stages of problem-solving in the process of solving geometry problems is due to a lack
of student's ability to understand the context of problems involving geometry material.

4637
Ramdjid, R. N., Sukestiyarno, S., Rochmad, R. & Mulyono, M. (2022). Students’ difficulties in solving geometry problems. Cypriot Journal of
Educational Science. 17(12), 4628-4640. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i12.7039

4. Conclusion
The ability of students to solve geometric problems based on Polya's stages suggests that most
students still have difficulty in solving mathematical problems, as marked by the outcomes of the
work done by pupils who answered in incomplete detail, incorrectly, or did not answer so that
students tended to be unable to understand the problem, formulate or think the solution plans,
and were unable to solve the problem according to the plan. In addition, students could not re-
examine the procedure and the complete results. Scaffolding is provided for students who cannot
solve mathematical problems in a structured and correct manner and for students who have
been directed to do recognition in the form of strengthening the answers obtained through other
procedures that provide accuracy that the answers obtained are correct and make
generalisations.

References

Aiym, Y., Galiya, K., Ademi, B., Adilet, M., Kamshat, Z., & Gulmira, K. (2022). Development of
the logical thinking of future mathematics teachers through the use of digital
educational technologies. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science, 17(6), 2001–2012.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i6.7548
Amhar, Sabrina, R., Sulasmi, E., & Saragih, M. (2022). Student critical thinking skills and
student writing ability: The role of teachers’ intellectual skills and student learning.
Cypriot Journal of Educational Science, 17(7), 2493–2510.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i7.7683
Andika, F., Pramudya, I., & Subanti, S. (2020). Problem posing and problem solving with
scientific approach in geometry learning. International Online Journal of Education
and Teaching (IOJET), 7(4). 1635–1642.
http://iojet.org/index.php/IOJET/article/view/1037
Anilan, B., & Berber, A. (2019). Effect of conversion factor on problem solving and experience
of teacher candidates. International Journal of Research in Education and Science
(IJRES), 5(1), 118–133. https://www.ijres.net/index.php/ijres/article/view/387
Antunovic-Piton, B. P., & Baranovic, N. (2022). Factors affecting success in solving a stand-
alone geometrical problem by students aged 14 to 15. CEPS Journal, | 12(1).
https://doi.org/ 10.26529/cepsj.889
Blanco, L. J., Barona, E. G., & Carrasco, A. C. (2013). Cognition and affect in mathematics
problem solving with prospective teachers. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 10(1 &
2), 335–
364. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/tme/vol10/iss1/15/
Booker, G., Bond, D., Sparrow, L., & Swan, P. (2014). Teaching primary mathematics. Pearson.
https://library.deakin.edu.au/record=b3666864~S1
Charles, R., & O’Daffer, P. (1997). How to evaluate progress in problem solving. NCTM..
https://www.amazon.com/Evaluate-Progress-Problem-Solving
NCTM/dp/0873532414
Chimmalee, B., & Anupan, A. (2022). Effect of model-eliciting activities using cloud
technology on the mathematical problem-solving ability of undergraduate students.
International Journal of Instruction, 15(2), 981–996.
https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15254a

4638
Ramdjid, R. N., Sukestiyarno, S., Rochmad, R. & Mulyono, M. (2022). Students’ difficulties in solving geometry problems. Cypriot Journal of
Educational Science. 17(12), 4628-4640. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i12.7039

Eka, P. I., Suharta, I. G. P., & Suparta, I. N. (2016). Faktor-Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi
Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika: Pengetahuan Awal, Apresiasi
Matematika, Dan Kecerdasan Logis Matematis. Prosiding Seminar Nasional FPMIPA
Undiksha. Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, Singaraja.
Fauzi, K. A., Dirgeyase, I. W., & Priyatno, A. (2019). Building learning path of mathematical
creative thinking of junior students on geometry topics by implementing
metacognitive approach. International Education Studies, 12(2), 57–6
Kadirbayeva, R., Pardala, A., Alimkulova, B., Adylbekova, E., Zhetpisbayeva, G., &
Jamankarayeva, M. (2022). Methodology of application of blended learning
technology in mathematics education. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science, 17(4),
1117–1129. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i4.7159
Kazemi, F., Fadaee, M. R., & Bayat, S. (2010). A subtle view to metacognitive aspect of
mathematical problems solving. Procedia Social and Behavior Scienc, 8, 420–426.
https://cyberleninka.org/article/n/370155
Misa’adah, F., & Mariani, S. (2021). Metacognition ability of grade X students in mathematical
problem solving through a digital project-based learning with edmodo. Unnes Journal
of Mathematics Education, 10(3), 174–181. doi: 10.15294/ujme.v10i3.53606
Mullis, I. V. S., Michael, O. M., Pierre, F., & Alka, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 International Results in
Mathematics. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational.
https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2011/international-results-mathematics.html
Nalurita, B. R., Nurcahyono, A., Walid, W., & Wardono, W. (2019). Optimalisasi Pemecahan
Masalah dalam Matematika. PRISMA, Prosiding Seminar Nasional Matematika, 2,
395– 402.
Polya, G. (1973). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method second. Princeton
University Press.
Siregar, N. (2017). Problem solving ability of students mathematics in problem based
learning.
Journal of Educational Science and Technology, 3,
185-189. http://dx.doi.org/10.26858/est.v3i3.4475
Sukoriyanto, S., Nusantara, T., Subanji, S., & Chandra, T. (2016). Students’ errors in solving the
permutation and combination problems based on problem solving steps of Polya.
International Education Studies,9(2), 2016
Tall, D. (ed.). Advanced mathemtical thinking. 2002 Kluwer Academic Publishers. ISBN 0-792-
31456-5 https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/0-306-47203-1
Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. Jossey-Bass.
https://www.scirp.org/(S(czeh2tfqyw2orz553k1w0r45))/reference/ReferencesPapers
.aspx?ReferenceID=1932817
Vinner, S. (1997). The pseudo-conceptual and the pseudo-analytical
thought processes in mathematics learning. Educational Studies in Mathematics,
34, 97–
129. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226977631
Zhang, D. (2017). Effects of visual working memory training and direct instruction on
geometry problem solving in students with geometry difficulties. Learning
Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal 15(1), 117–138.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1141989.pdf

4639
Ramdjid, R. N., Sukestiyarno, S., Rochmad, R. & Mulyono, M. (2022). Students’ difficulties in solving geometry problems. Cypriot Journal of
Educational Science. 17(12), 4628-4640. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i12.7039

Zhu, Z. (2007). Gender differences in mathematical problem solving patterns: A review of

literature. International Education Journal, 8(2), 187–203.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ834219

4640