Published date:Nov 11 2024

Journal Title: KnE Social Sciences

Issue title: 8th International Seminar on Education 2024 (8th Isedu)

Pages:118–127

DOI: 10.18502/kss.v9i31.17563

Christina M. Laamenachristinalaamena@gmail.comDepartment of Mathematics Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Pattimura University Ambon - Indonesia

Carolina S. AyalDepartment of Mathematics Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Pattimura University Ambon - Indonesia

Taufan TalibDepartment of Mathematics Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Pattimura University Ambon - Indonesia

It is important for students to master numeracy literacy as part of the minimum competency assessment, in order to have the thinking skills needed in the 21st century. This research aims to describe the numeracy literacy abilities of junior high school students in mountainous areas. This research uses a mixed method. The data collected is quantitative in the form of numeracy literacy test results and qualitative data in the form of interview results to describe students’ weaknesses in numeracy literacy. The research results showed that student’s literacy skills still remain at levels 1 and 2. Less than 20% of students were at level 3, and there were no students at levels 5 and 6. The category of students is that intervention and basic literacy skills are needed. The qualitative analysis concluded that the cause of low literacy was low communication, mathematization, and representation skills. In terms of indicators of mathematical ability, there are various basic concepts that students have not mastered so they experience difficulty in solving mathematical problems. Apart from that the reasoning that occurs is still imitation in nature, students still tend to memorize and use standard and imperfect procedures. The strategy used only imitates the teacher’s strategy, while students have not used new strategies which causes literacy to still be at a lower level.

Keywords: numeracy, literacy, numeracy literacy level, mountains areas

[1] Kemdikbud. Permendikbudristek nomor 17 tahun 2021. Kementeri Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknol. 2021;1–10.

[2] OECD. PISA 2018 Results. 2018.

[3] OECD. OECD WEEK 2 0 1 5 Meeting of the OECD Council at Ministerial Level OECD INNOVATION STRATEGY 2015 AN AGENDA FOR POLICY ACTION. 2016;( June):1–2. Available from: www.oecd.orgtel.:+33

[4] Susanto NC, Hartati SJ, Setiawan W. Desain Pembelajaran Peningkatan Literasi Numerasi Dan Karakter Berpikir Kritis Siswa Sd Berbasis Etnomatematika. Cent Educ J. 2022;3(01):50–61.

[5] Cahyanovianty A, Wahidin W. Analisis Kemampan Numerasi Peserta Didik Kelas VIII dalam Menyelesaikan Soal Asesmen Kompetensi Minimum (AKM). J Cendekia J Pendidik Mat. 2021;5(2):1439–48.

[6] Fauzi A, Sawitri D, Syahrir S. Kesulitan Guru Pada Pembelajaran Matematika Di Sekolah Dasar. J Ilm Mandala Educ. 2020;6(1):142–8.

[7] Fauziah A, Sobari EF, Robandi B. Analisis Pemahaman Guru Sekolah Menengah Pertama (SMP) Mengenai Asesmen Kompetensi Minimum (AKM). Edukatif J Ilmu Pendidik [Internet]. 2021;3(4):1550–8. Available from: https://edukatif.org/index.php/edukatif/article/view/608

[8] Fiangga SM, Amin S, Khabibah S, Ekawati R, Rinda Prihartiwi N. Penulisan Soal Literasi Numerasi bagi Guru SD di Kabupaten Ponorogo. J Anugerah. 2019;1(1):9–18.

[9] Ahmad DN, Setyowati L, Ati AP. Kemampuan Guru dalam Asesmen Kompetensi Minimum (AKM) untuk Mengetahui Kemampuan Literasi dan Numerasi Peserta Didik. Pros Disk Panel Nas Pendidik Mat. 2021;7(1):129–35.

[10] Novianti DE. Asesmen Kompetensi Minimum (AKM) dan Kaitannya dengan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika. Semin Nas Pendidik LPPM IKIP PGRI Bojonegoro; 2021. pp. 85–91.

[11] Purwasih R, Sari NR, Agustina S. Analisis kemampuan literasi matematik dan mathematical habits of mind siswa SMP pada materi bangun ruang sisi datar. Numeracy. 2018;5(1):67–76.

[12] Anggrieni N, Putri RI. Analisis Kemampuan Literasi Matematika Siswa dalam Menyelesaikan Soal Tipe PISA 2015. Univ Muhammadiyah Surakarta. 2011;2018:472–81.

[13] Laamena CM, Laurens T. Mathematical literacy ability and metacognitive characteristics of mathematics pre-service teacher. Infin J. 2021 Aug;10(2):259–70.

[14] Saputri RA. Analisis Interpretasi Bahasa Matematika Siswa Kelas V SDN Malinau (Loksado, Kal-Sel). THETA J Pendidik Mat. 2020;2(1):20–6.

[15] Effendi A. Implementasi Model Creative Problem Solving Untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Metakognitif Berdasarkan Kemampuan Awal Matematis Siswa. JPPM J Penelit Dan Pembelajaran Mat. 2016;9(2):165–76.

[16] Rosmaiyadi R, Mariyam M, Juliyanti J. Pemahaman Konsep Matematis Siswa Dengan Strategi Pembelajaran Group To Gruop Exchange Berpendekatan Kontekstual. J Penelit dan Pembelajaran Mat. 2018;11(1).

[17] Kurniadi G, Purwaningrum JP. Kesalahan Siswa Pada Kategori Kemampuan Awal Matematis Rendah Dalam Penyelesaian Tes Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematis. J Penelit dan Pembelajaran Mat. 2018;11(2).

[18] Badjeber R, Mailili WH. Analisis Pengetahuan Prosedural Siswa Kelas Smp Pada Materi Sistem Persamaan Linear Dua Variabel Ditinjau Dari Gaya Kognitif. J Penelit dan Pembelajaran Mat. 2018;11(2):41–54.

[19] Tupamahu PZ, Ratumanan TG, Laamena C. Students’ mathematical representation and communication ability in mathematics problem solving. J Didakt Mat. 2023;10(1):111–30.

[20] Laamena CM, Nusantara T, Irawan EB, Muksar M. How do the undergraduate students use an example in mathematical proof construction: A study based on argumentation and proving activity. Int Electron J Math Educ. 2018;13(3):185–98.

[21] Amala MA. Profil Proses Matematisasi Horizontal dan Vertikal Siswa SMP dalam Menyelesaikan Masalah Kontekstual Pecahan Ditinjau dari Kemampuan Matematika. MATHEdunesa J Ilm Pendidik Mat. 2016;3(5):300–9.

[22] Jediut M. Sabina Ndiung, Fransiska Jaiman Madu. Kemampuan Matematisasi Siswa SD dalam Menyelesaikan Soal Non Rutin. J Elem Edukasia. 2023;6(3):1510–8.

[23] Chasanah IM. Proses Matematisasi Siswa Smp Dalam Menyelesaikan Masalah Kontekstual Ditinjau Dari Kemampuan Matematika. MATHEdunesa. 2021;10(1):69– 78.

[24] Hamidy A, Jailani J. Kemampuan proses matematis siswa Kalimantan Timur dalam menyelesaikan soal matematika model PISA. J Ris Pendidik Mat. 2019;6(2):133–49.

[25] Jonsson B, Mossegård J, Lithner J, Karlsson Wirebring L. Creative Mathematical Reasoning: Does Need for Cognition Matter? Front Psychol. 2022 Jan;12( January):797807.

[26] Norqvist M, Jonsson B, Lithner J, Qwillbard T, Holm L. Investigating algorithmic and creative reasoning strategies by eye tracking. J Math Behav [Internet]. 2019;55(April):0–1. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2019.03.008.

[27] Sukirwan DD, Herman T. Analysis of students’ mathematical reasoning. J Phys Conf Ser. 2018;948(1).

[28] Agusti FA, Herman T, Zafirah A. Kemampuan Penalaran Imitatif Dan Kreatif Matematis Siswa Smp Pada Materi Persamaan Garis Lurus. AKSIOMA J Progr Stud Pendidik Mat. 2023;12(1):1447.