Mathematical Error Patterns to Facilitate Solving Math Problems for Junior

High School Students

Erina Siskawati
Universitas Negeri Semarang

Zaenuri
Universitas Negeri Semarang

St. Budi Waluya

Universitas Negeri Semarang

Iwan Junaedi
Universitas Negeri Semarang

Mathematical understanding is important in problem-solving. This study aimed to find patterns of

mathematical understanding errors in solving mathematics problems for junior high school students.
The method used in this study is qualitative. Data collection uses triangulation. Interviews were
conducted on three subjects during one month at Islamic Junior High School. Data collection
techniques are carried out through triangulation, namely test results, interviews, and observations.
The intrusion used is a math problem-solving test. This study found patterns of errors in solving
mathematical problems in the field of geometry. From the results, it was found that the biggest error
pattern was in calculating the area and perimeter of rectangles and parallelograms. Stakeholders can
also use the results of this research in education to encourage understanding of geometric concepts
in education at the secondary level. This study offers educational authorities policy options regarding
the importance of understanding mathematics in general and geometry in particular for students.

Keywords: mathematical error, error patterns, problem solving, math education

INTRODUCTION

Mathematical understanding is one of the basics of practicing physics. The development of

mathematical understanding involves mathematical structures and actions (Kaba & Şengül, 2018). An
understanding of mathematical learning characterizes and articulates the growth of mathematical
understanding and mathematical ways of thinking (Gulkilik et al., 2020). The interaction between learning
strategies and critical thinking skills influences a student's mathematical understanding (Andayani et al.,
2020). Mathematical understanding forms the initial conception for the meaning of a mathematical concept
or initial idea in solving a particular mathematical problem (Yao & Manouchehri, 2020). A person's

112 Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 22(9) 2022
mathematical ability can facilitate problem-solving. Problem-solving is one of the most important human
cognitive activities (Gr. Voskoglou, 2021). One of the mathematical abilities is to master mathematical
concepts, which include interrelated mathematical objects (Simon et al., 2018). Basic mathematical
concepts that cannot be avoided include algebra and geometry. There are mathematical skills that can be
used to understand concepts, reason, solve problems, communicate mathematical ideas, and make
mathematical connections (Hafiz et al., 2017). The basic concept of geometry can solve everyday life
problems. Geometry is a study of space and shape that requires a high-level of visualization skills (Liburd
& Jen, 2021).
However, in reality, the basic concepts of mathematics, including geometry, are not understood by
many students (Maričić & Stamatović, 2018). According to Baye et al. (2021), the inclusion of a mathematic
learning curriculum can improve a student’s understanding of mathematical concepts, including the basic
concepts of geometry that are necessary for solving everyday problems. The concept of geometry is used
for problem-solving and critical thinking skills that can be used in the coding environment of students (Kim
et al., 2021). Understanding of matter is not balanced with prerequisite material as the primary link. Group
prerequisite material requires logic to recognize mathematical structures (Durand-Guerrier & Hausberger,
2015; Junarti et al., 2020). Errors in solving mathematical problems result when prerequisite material is not
mastered beforehand. The misconception of the prerequisite material is also found in the function material
(Kamid et al., 2020). The conceptual error that often occurs is the inability to identify relevant information.
This research aims to identify common error patterns in understanding mathematical problems in order to
improve mathematical problem solving. This research will assist teachers in improving math learning and
highlight the significance and importance of understanding geometry for high school students in the policy
to the education authorities.

RESEARCH METHOD

The method used in this study is qualitative. Three students from class VII from every semester of
2021/2022, participated in this study. The three subjects are called Student 1 (S1), Student 2 (S2), and
Student 3 (S3). The students were selected based on specific considerations; the student was cooperative,
interactive and once interviewed, information regarding the mathematical understanding process of the
student could be obtained. The assessments used included the results from math problem-solving tests on
geometry subjects as well as information obtained from the interviews.
The mathematical problem-solving tests were first validated in geometry students, before presenting
them to S1, S2 and S3. Data was obtained through test results, interviews, and observations. Stages in
solving mathematical problems include reading (R), comprehension (C), transformations (T), processing
(P) and encoding (E). Data analysis techniques used source triangulation models, namely data collection,
data tabulation and presentation, and inference.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

TABLE 1
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENTS FOR PROBLEM NUMBER 1: THE ABILITY TO MASTER
BASIC MATHEMATICAL CONCEPTS

Student Question 1
R C T P E
S1 √ √ X X X
S2 √ √ √ X X
S3 √ √ √ X X
R=Reading; C=Comprehension; T=Transformation; P=Process Skill; E=Encoding

Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 22(9) 2022 113
 At stages R and C, all students have answered correctly (Table 1). For S1 at stage T, writing the formula
to solve mathematical problems is incorrect, resulting in the subsequent stages being incorrect. S2 and S3
were unable to perform algebraic operations of the known rectangle in the problem, therefore, stage P is
incorrect. The results from the student interviews indicate that the students do not understand algebraic
operations. The pattern of the students’ mathematical misrepresentations in solving mathematical problems
on rectangular and cross-aligned materials involves four error patterns. First, the students do not understand
error patterns in algebraic operation if the data in the problem is given in algebraic form. However, the
students can logically determine the length in algebraic form because the area of the rectangle is 200 m and
the width is 8 m, therefore the length can be determined by a simple division of these values. Third, the
area of the road installed ceramics cannot be determined because of the previous errors made by the
students. The student does not understand that if each side of the pool is bigger than 2 m, the size of the
pool and the road to be made needs to be 29 m long and 12 m wide. The student solves the problem by trial
and error to get the length asked, but the next step cannot be performed. Therefore, the students did not
understand basic mathematics concepts, including basic geometry concepts. Errors in algebra learning are
largely teacher-centered and procedurally oriented, limiting students' opportunities to understand algebra
(Litke, 2020). Students have difficulty distinguishing between numbers and signs of operations involved in
algebra (Pratiwi et al., 2019). Student reasoning in representing algebra have various performance levels
(Lepak et al., 2018).

TABLE 2
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENTS FOR PROBLEM NUMBER 2: CONVERTING QUESTIONS
INTO MATHEMATICAL SENTENCES

Student Question 2
R C T P E
S1 √ √ √ X X
S2 √ √ √ X X
S3 √ √ √ X X
R=Reading; C=Comprehension; T=Transformation; P=Process Skill; E=Encoding

At stages R, C, and T, all the students answered correctly (Table 2). However, it appears that the three
students cannot convert the problem into a mathematical equation. The students could not write the length
of the garden twice the width top = 21. The students experimented in determining the width of the cassava
garden by halving the known circumference.
Furthermore, the width of the garden determined is divided by three to get a garden width of 8 m. The
interview results indicate that the students did not understand how to convert the problem into a
mathematical equation. These results are in line with previous research that found that students had
difficulty understanding the meaning of the questions and had difficulty translating questions into math
sentences (Sidik et al., 2021).

TABLE 3
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENTS FOR PROBLEM NUMBER 3: CHANGING THE
UNIT OF WEIGHT

Student Question 3
R C T P E
S1 √ √ √ X X
S2 √ √ √ √ √
S3 √ √ √ √ √
R=Reading; C=Comprehension; T=Transformation; P=Process Skill; E=Encoding

114 Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 22(9) 2022
 The students did not understand the unit of weight, resulting in a miscalculation of the problem. At
phase R, C, and T, all students answered correctly (Table 3). However, S1 could not convert ounce to
kilogram. In addition to not being able to convert weight units, S1 could not perform functions properly at
the process skill stage. The interview results confirm that S1 could not convert ounce to grams because they
did not understand how to do so. On the other hand, S2 and S3 work stage by step correctly. Supported by
the interview information, these students understand that 1 kg equal 10 ounces. A middle school students'
understanding of using units of measure relates to the students' understanding of numbers and
measurements (Sidik et al., 2021). In contrast, units of measurement are necessary for conceptual
understanding of size and scale (Delgado, 2010). The basic concept of geometry can be used to calculate
the amount of ceramic cassava products to be installed in plantations, the amount of income gained from
harvesting fish in a pond, tomato harvest income, and others as previous research has stated that
understanding units of measurement is essential for search engines (Heidari et al., 2021).

TABLE 4
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT FOR PROBLEM NUMBER 4: IDENTIFYING RELEVANT
INFORMATION WITHIN A MATHEMATICAL PROBLEM

Student Question 4
R C T P E
S1 √ √ √ X X
S2 √ √ √ X X
S3 √ √ √ X X
R=Reading; C=Comprehension; T=Transformation; P=Process Skill; E=Encoding

The students could write down the problem but did not understand how to identify information within
the sentence that was needed to solve the problem. All students answered stages R, C, and T correctly
(Table 4). All students could write down what is known or asked, as well as the formula used, but could
not determine the length of side AB. S1 could not complete anything at the skill process stage. S2 used the
triangle formula by incorrectly inserting known quantities. S3 used the Pythagoras formula to determine
the length of the AB side. The students could not determine the base and height of the line during the
interview. The students were confused with the different plinths and heights of the same line in determining
its breadth. The students demonstrated an inability to identify the relevant information that is beneficial in
solving problems. According to Setiani et al. (2018), students with low self-efficacy cannot structure
problem-solving in math literacy problems. However, according to Taufik & Zainab (2021), dependent
field students can identify information by using sentences in questions and using verbal, symbolic, and
representative mathematical models. Identifying relevant information in mathematical problems and
arguments affects the different levels of students' reasoning ability to solve problems (Wulandari & Wutsqa,
2019). Computation skills determine a student's ability to identify relevant information to complete
calculations (Hegener, 2021). In addition, the ability to identify information in different contexts, learning
and developing students assist academic work information literacy skills in managing their well-being
(Martzoukou et al., 2021).
Understanding of the material is not balanced with the prerequisite material as the main material link.
Prerequisite material is supportive in the breakdown of rectangular and aligned materials. However,
student's ability to understand mathematics is still low because students believe that mathematics is not
important (Nurapriani et al., 2020). Prerequisite materials use algebraic operations in calculating the size to
be sought. Therefore, it is important to emphasize the prerequisite materials students must understand.

CONCLUSION

Mathematical error patterns can facilitate mathematical problem solving of high school students.
Patterns of mathematical comprehension errors can be applied in the teaching and learning process to

Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 22(9) 2022 115
facilitate mathematical problem solving. Teachers can use the study results to illustrate how important the
concept of geometry is for junior high school students. Applying pattern concepts requires the supervision
in the implementation of learning. The pattern presented in this study is expected to be an important
contribution to parties invested in improving students' understanding of the concept of mathematical
geometry both locally, nationally, and internationally.

REFERENCES

Andayani, S., Muchtar, H., Yufiarti, & Susanto, E. (2020). The effect of learning strategies and critical
thinking skills on mathematical understanding based on initial ability. International Journal of
Innovation, Creativity and Change, 13(2), 476–489.
Baye, M.G., Ayele, M.A., & Wondimuneh, T.E. (2021). Implementing GeoGebra integrated with multi-
teaching approaches guided by the APOS theory to enhance students’ conceptual understanding
of limit in Ethiopian Universities. Heliyon, 7(5), e07012.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07012
Delgado, C. (2010). Units of length: A notational system for conceptual understanding of size and scale.
Learning in the Disciplines: ICLS 2010 Conference Proceedings - 9th International Conference
of the Learning Sciences, 2(April), 362–363.
Durand-Guerrier, V., & Hausberger, T. (2015). Définitions Et Exemples : Prérequis Pour L’Apprentissage
De L’Algèbre Moderne. ANNALES de DIDACTIQUE et de SCIENCES COGNITIVES, 20, 101–
148.
Gr. Voskoglou, M. (2021). Problem Solving and Mathematical Modelling. American Journal of
Educational Research, 9(2), 85–90. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-9-2-6
Gulkilik, H., Moyer-Packenham, P.S., Ugurlu, H.H., & Yuruk, N. (2020). Characterizing the growth of
one student’s mathematical understanding in a multi-representational learning environment.
Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 58, 100756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2020.100756
Hafiz, M., Darhim, & Dahlan, J.A. (2017). Comparison of Mathematical Resilience among Students with
Problem Based Learning and Guided Discovery Learning Model. Journal of Physics: Conference
Series, 895(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/895/1/012098
Hegener, M.A. (2021). Design and evaluation of an application-based pharmaceutical calculations review
module. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 13(8), 1018–1023.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2021.06.016
Heidari, G., Ramadan, A., Stocker, M., & Auer, S. (2021). Leveraging a Federation of Knowledge Graphs
to Improve Faceted Search in Digital Libraries. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including
Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 12866
LNCS, 141–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86324-1_18
Junarti, Sukestiyarno, Y.L., Mulyono, & Dwidayati, N.K. (2020). The process of structure sense of group
prerequisite material: A case in indonesian context. European Journal of Educational Research,
9(3), 1047–1061. https://doi.org/10.12973/EU-JER.9.3.1047
Kaba, Y., & Şengül, S. (2018). The relationship between middle school students’ mathematics anxiety
and their mathematical understanding. Pegem Egitim ve Ogretim Dergisi, 8(3), 599–622.
https://doi.org/10.14527/pegegog.2018.023
Kamid, Anwar, K., Syaiful, Sofnidar, Liani, L., & Kurniawan, W. (2020). Investigation into first-year
college students’ misconceptions about limit concept: A case study based on cognitive style.
Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(4), 1445–1452.
https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080437
Kim, Y.R., Park, M.S., & Tjoe, H. (2021). Discovering concepts of geometry through robotics coding
activities. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 9(3),
406–425. https://doi.org/10.46328/IJEMST.1205
Lepak, J.R., Wernet, J.L.W., & Ayieko, R.A. (2018). Capturing and characterizing students’ strategic
algebraic reasoning through cognitively demanding tasks with focus on representations. Journal

116 Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 22(9) 2022
 of Mathematical Behavior, 50(October 2017), 57–73.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2018.01.003
Liburd, K.K.D., & Jen, H.Y. (2021). Investigating the effectiveness of using a technological approach on
students’ achievement in mathematics–case study of a high school in a Caribbean country.
Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105586
Litke, E. (2020). Instructional practice in algebra: Building from existing practices to inform an
incremental improvement approach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 91, 103030.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103030
Maričić, S.M., & Stamatović, J.D. (2018). The effect of preschool mathematics education in development
of geometry concepts in children. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology
Education, 13(9), 6175–6187. https://doi.org/10.12973/EURASIA.2017.01057A
Martzoukou, K., Kostagiolas, P., Lavranos, C., Lauterbach, T., & Fulton, C. (2021). A study of university
law students’ self-perceived digital competences. Journal of Librarianship and Information
Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006211048004
Nurapriani, F., Lestari, S.A.P., & Kusumaningrum, D.S. (2020). Mathematical understanding ability of
information system students in discrete mathematics. International Journal of Scientific and
Technology Research, 9(3), 3335–3339.
Pratiwi, W.D., Kurniadi, E., & Astuti, P. (2019). Learning design for transition from arithmetic thinking
to algebraic thinking. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1166(1).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1166/1/012031
Setiani, C., Waluya, S.B., & Wardono. (2018). Analysis of mathematical literacy ability based on self-
efficacy in model eliciting activities using metaphorical thinking approach. Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, 983(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/983/1/012139
Sidik, G.S., Suryadi, Di., & Turmudi. (2021). Learning Obstacle of Addition Operation Whole Number in
Elementary Schools. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1842(1).
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1842/1/012070
Simon, M.A., Kara, M., Placa, N., & Avitzur, A. (2018). Towards an integrated theory of mathematics
conceptual learning and instructional design: The Learning Through Activity theoretical
framework. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 52, 95–112.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2018.04.002
Taufik, A.R., & Zainab, N. (2021). Mathematical literacy of students in solving PISA-like problems
based on cognitive styles of field-dependent and field-independent. Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, 1918(4), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1918/4/042080
Wulandari, S.Y., & Wutsqa, D.U. (2019). A study of junior high school students reasoning skill in
mathematics. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1320(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
6596/1320/1/012059
Yao, X., & Manouchehri, A. (2020). Teacher interventions for advancing students’ mathematical
understanding. Education Sciences, 10(6), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10060164

Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice Vol. 22(9) 2022 117