Traditionally taught students erred far more than REACT students on the visual representation indicator of making an image of a real-world situation¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? On contextual problem 1b (decorative lamp cube), 66.67% of traditional-learning students erred versus 13.04% of REACT students. → Sari 2018
Evidence¶
Sari 2018¶
Sari, D.P., Darhim, & Rosjanuardi, R. (2018). Errors of students learning with REACT strategy in solving the problems of mathematical representation ability. Journal on Mathematics Education, 9(1), 121-128. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1173659
q2 · i? · causal · r1
Posttest error analysis in the static-group comparison study. Problem 1b was a contextual question about a decorative lamp cube with edge length 25 cm and transparent paper of 120 cm × 90 cm; students had difficulty identifying which formula to use.
"Students who experienced error about number 1b who obtained learning with REACT strategy as much as 13.04%, while students who obtained traditional learning 66.67%."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The mean percentage of student errors on mathematical representation was lower for REACT-strategy students (21.74%) than for traditionally taught students (47.92%) — a broader claim this one bears on
- The most prominent errors in mathematical representation for both REACT and traditionally taught students occur on the symbolic representation indicator (solving problems involving arithmetic symbols) — related
- A volume-formula misconception (writing volume as s × s × s for a cuboid cake) occurred only among traditionally taught students, not REACT students — related
- Interactive visual grounding helped children interpret word problems by making hidden relational constraints manipulable and visible — related
- Students and faculty value real-world examples in gateway math, but limited resources and training often lead to procedural instruction — a broader claim this one bears on
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.